Division  3SSII 
Section     .J  "2/ 


BIBLE  CRITICISM 

AND  THE 
AVERAGE   MAN 


BIBLE    CRITICISM 

AND  THE 

AVERAGE    MAN 


BY 
Howard  Agnew  Johnston,  Ph.D.,  D.D, 

Author  of 

"god's  methods  of  training  workers" 


New  York        Chicago        Toronto 
FLEMING  H.  REVELL   COMPANY 

London  ^  Edinburg 


Copyright  1902 

BY 

FLEMING  H.  REVELL  COMPANY 
(August) 


TO  Mr  MOTHER 


INTRODUCTION 

A  POPULAR  hand-book  on  the  subject  of 
Bible  Criticism  is  a  wide-spread  need. 
A  new  generation  of  Christian  young 
men  and  women  is  demanding  intelligent  dis- 
cussion of  the  subject.  Their  demand  is  rea- 
sonable. They  should  be  informed.  As  far  as 
possible  the  story  of  the  movement  should  be  told 
in  plain  words  for  plain  people.  Above  all  things 
else  the  statement  of  the  case  should  seek  to 
settle  faith,  rather  than  foment  doubts  and  ques- 
tionings. Such  is  the  task  undertaken  in  this 
book. 

It  is  time  to  attempt  to  measure  the  real  char- 
acter of  the  critical  movement,  to  establish  its 
true  value,  and  to  fix  a  definite  attitude  toward 
its  various  claims.  It  was  necessary  to  wait  until 
the  field  has  been  exploited  about  as  thoroughly 
as  the  nature  of  the  movement  would  allow.  That 
time  has  practically  been  reached.  Nothing  ma- 
terially new  is  now  appearing,  or  is  likely  to  ap- 
7 


8  Introduction 

pear,  so  far  as  the  fundamental  theories  are  con- 
cerned. 

The  plan  of  the  book  involves  many  references 
to  writers  in  a  general  way,  without  giving 
volume  and  page.  It  was  deemed  wise  thus  to 
give  a  less  technical  account  of  opinion.  Yet  the 
reference  is  usually  sufficiently  specific  to  allow 
one  who  may  desire  to  consult  fully  the  author- 
ities mentioned. 

Howard  Agnew  Johnston. 

New  York,  1902. 


CONTENTS 


THE  AVERAGE  MAN 

PAGE 
A  large  factor  in  any  problem.    Not  sufficiently  con- 
sidered by  the  specialist.     Specialists  in  disagree- 
ment.    The  critics  over-confident.    Gladstone  on 
various  grounds  for  judging  Scripture 21 

II 

THE  BIBLE 

The  Book  of  books.  Opinions  of  great  men.  Unique 
character  explained.  Statement  of  Robertson 
Smith.     Increased  circulation.     Priceless  value. .     26 

III 

LITERARY   CRITICISM   OF   THE  BIBLE 

The  Bible  is  literature.  Genuine  criticism  necessary. 
Higher  Criticism  defined.  Statement  of  Principal 
Fairbairn.  Considerable  unreliability  in  the  work 
of  the  critics.  The  claim  of  Dr.  Briggs  denied  by 
Dr.  Zenos.  The  recent  discussions  about  Homer 
and  Thackeray.  A  precarious  science  at  best....  32 
9 


lo  Contents 

IV 

A  LESSON  IN  CONFIDENCE 

PAGE 

Transition  times  involve  dangers  to  be  avoided. 
Ultra  conservative  as  hurtful  as  ultra  radical. 
The  era  of  the  new  physical  science  and  its  con- 
flict. The  three  classes  of  men  involved.  Facts 
won  against  prejudice  and  assumption.  Reassur- 
ance followed.  The  same  experience  in  Biblical 
criticism  now.  The  outcome  certain  to  conserve 
truth  41 


HONOUR  TO  HONOURABLE  CRITICS 

The  average  man  desires  to  be  fair.  Sometimes  diffi- 
cult. Duty  of  all  Christians  toward  Christian 
critics.  Statement  of  Dr.  George  Adam  Smith. 
Representative  of  a  group  of  critics.  Position  of 
Dr.  McGiffert.  Conservative  critics  must  also  be 
recognized.  Have  not  been  honoured  as  they  de- 
serve       46 

VI 

VARIOUS  THEORIES  ABOUT  THE  PENTA- 
TEUCH 

The  main  battle  ground  in  the  discussion.  Early 
intimations  of  the  modern  differences  of  opinion. 
The  Document  Theory.  The  Fragment  Theory. 
The  Supplement  Theory.  The  Crystallization 
Theory.     The  Modified  Document  Theory.     The 


Contents  1 1 

PAGB 

Development  Theory.  Three  codes  frequently 
mentioned.  Genesis  in  Colours.  Four  lines  of 
proof  urged  by  the  critics.  A  wide  difference  in 
details,  though  a  general  agreement  about  the 
whole  subject   54 

VII 

WHAT  IS  SCIENTIFIC  SCHOLARSHIP? 

The  inquiry  pertinent.  Majorities  not  enough.  The 
twofold  demand  of  exact  science.  Dangers  in 
the  indulgence  of  the  critical  imagination.  State- 
ments of  Professors  Cheyne  and  Evans.  Com- 
parative trustworthiness  of  Scriptural  and  other 
records.  Statements  of  Drs.  Francis  Brown,  Har- 
per, and  others 66 

VIII 

FACTS  FROM  THE  MONUMENTS 

Statement  of  Prof.  Sayce.  A  former  assumption  of 
the  critics  demolished.  Discoveries  of  Tel  el 
Amarna  and  Tel  el  Hesy.  Literary  activity  proved 
in  the  time  of  Abraham.  Other  corroborations  of 
Scripture.  Statements  of  Rawlinson  and  Brugsch 
Bey  regarding  the  Egyptology.  The  Akkadian 
record  of  the  flood.    Ur  of  the  Chaldees 73 

IX 

THE  HISTORIC  MOSES 

Historical  arguments  involved.  The  effort  to  elimi- 
nate Moses.     Vital  importance  of  the  establish- 


12  Contents 

PAGE 

ment  of  the  Theocracy.  Substantial  Mosaic  au- 
thorship more  important  than  any  other  question 
of  authorship.  Prima  facie  assumption  of  Mosaic 
authorship.  Acknowledged  by  Kuenen.  Histori- 
cal Israel  involves  the  Mosaic  system.  Testimony 
of  Scripture  8i 

X 

THE  BOOK  OF  GENESIS 

General  purpose  of  the  Bible.  Special  purpose  of 
Genesis.  Unity  of  the  record.  Moses  used  a 
variety  of  material.  Analysis  of  the  contents. 
Probable  later  interpolations  and  comments.  An- 
tiquity of  man  and  Chronology  of  Genesis.  The 
element  of  Allegory  in  Genesis 88 

XI 

THE  BOOK  OF  EXODUS 

We  touch  Moses  here.  Purpose  of  the  book.  Ob- 
jections to  Mosaic  authorship  considered.  Unity 
of  the  historic  movement.  Egyptology  proved 
accurate.     The  Tabernacle  discussion 95 

XII 

THE  BOOK  OF  LEVITICUS 

The  centre  and  heart  of  the  Pentateuch.  Views 
about  the  legislation.  Tokens  of  early  origin. 
Pre-Canaanite  indications.  A  prophetic  character 
to  the  book 100 


Contents  13 

XIII 
THE  BOOK  OF  NUMBERS 

PAGE 

Numerous  special  problems.  The  gap  of  thirty-seven 
years.  Difficulties  involved  in  the  figures.  The 
place  of  the  Levites.  The  episode  of  Balaam.  In- 
dications of  Mosaic  authorship.  Evidences  of 
later  interpolations   107 

XIV 

THE  BOOK  OF  DEUTERONOMY 

The  title  likely  to  mislead.  It  breathes  the  atmos- 
phere of  the  living  Moses.  Critics  oppose  Mosaic 
authorship.  Theory  of  special  authorship  in  Jo- 
siah's  time.  Reasons  for  such  a  theory  insufficient. 
Parallel  discovery  by  Luther  in  Dark  Ages  of 
Christianity.  The  theory  not  a  scientific  infer- 
ence, but  a  preconceived  assumption 113 

XV 

THE  BOOK  OF  JOSHUA 

Jewish  idea  of  the  Pentateuch.  Joshua  and  the 
Hexateuch.  Inferences  from  the  Book  of  Jasher. 
Theories  of  later  au<-horship.  Indications  of  early 
authorship.  Joshua  and  Moses.  The  high  level 
of  the  early  beginning  of  Israel.  The  ultimate 
outcome  of  the  critical  movement  will  give  Moses 
an   abiding  place 119 


14  Contents 

XVI 

THE  BOOKS  OF  JUDGES  AND  SAMUEL 

PAGE 

Judges  not  technically  history,  but  collection  of 
narratives.  Fact  of  silence  about  the  Tabernacle 
noted.  A  gradual  development  in  Israel,  but  not 
such  as  to  preclude  a  high  beginning  with  Moses. 
Samuel  the  organizer  of  national  life.  Second 
Samuel  and  the  Life  of  David.  Light  upon  some 
ofi  the  Psalms 124 

XVII 

THE  BOOKS  OF  KINGS  AND  CHRONICLES 

Relations  of  both  books  involved  in  serious  prob- 
lems. Both  have  same  general  plan.  The  scope 
of  Kings.  The  scope  of  Chronicles.  The  article 
of  Dr.  Francis  Brown.  Serious  difficulties  in 
Chronicles.  Actual  and  alleged  discrepancies. 
Expla,nations  ofifered.  The  Priests,  the  Taber- 
nacle, and  the  Temple.  Revolutionary  theory  of 
the  critics.  Reasons  against  it.  Details  consid- 
ered.    Not  likely  to  be  accepted 129 

XVIII 

THE  POETICAL  BOOKS 

Do  not  demand  special  attention.  The  Book  of  Job. 
The  Book  of  Psalms.  The  Song  of  Songs  which 
is  Solomon's.  The  Wisdom  Literature.  The 
Book  of  Lamentations 141 


Contents  1 5 

XIX 

THE  MAJOR  PROPHETS 

PAGE 

Most  of  the  prophetic  books  present  few  large  prob- 
lems. The  Book  of  Isaiah.  Differing  view  of  two 
Oxford  Professors.  Views  of  Prof.  Driver.  Opin- 
ions of  Prof.  Margoliouth.  The  Books  of  Jere- 
miah and  Ezekiel.  Imagery  of  Ezekiel.  The  Book 
of  Daniel.  Special  theories  considered.  Indica- 
tions that  it  belongs  In  the  Persian  period 145 

XX 

THE  MINOR  PROPHETS 

The  Book  of  the  Twelve.  The  work  of  Dr.  George 
Adam  Smith.  Difficulties  recognized.  The  Book 
of  Amos  genuine.  The  unity  of  Hosea  maintained. 
Micah  probably  all  authentic.  Critical  points  in 
the  other  nine  books  not  as  important  as  his- 
torical.    Special  reference  to  Jonah 156 

XXI 

THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS 

Recent  discussion  of  New  Testament  material.  His- 
toric value  of  the  Gospels.  Christ  portrayed,  not 
described.  New  criticism  examined  the  sources. 
Statement  of  Dr.  Fairbairn.  A  word  of  warning 
against  the  discussions  in  the  Encyclopedia  Bib- 
lica.  Views  of  Schmiedel  and  Abbott.  Dr.  Mc- 
Giffert  on  the  general  theory  of  the  Evangelical 


1 6  Contents 

PAGE 

critics.  Dr.  Gregory  on  Why  Four  Gospels.  Indi- 
cations of  Independence  in  authorship.  Material 
fixed  in  the  second  half  of  the  first  century 162 

XXII 

THE  ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES 

The  index  to  the  development  of  the  Church.  Gen- 
eral opinion  as  to  Luke's  authorship.  Discussion 
of  the  "  we "  passages.  Written  about  the  year 
80.  Prof.  Ramsey  on  the  historical  value  of  Acts. 
The  Judaistic  and  universal  tendencies  in  the  early 
Church.  The  true  liberty  of  the  Gospel  came 
mainly  through  Paul.  Paul's  unique  preparation 
for  his  life  work.  Dr.  McGiffert's  statement  of 
Paul's  conception  of  Christianity.  The  contro- 
versy in  the  Church  largely  Pauline  and  anti- 
Pauline    171 

XXIII 

THE  WRITINGS  OF  JAMES,  PETER  AND  JUDE 

The  authoritative  New  Testament  Canon.  The  epis- 
tle of  James  first  in  the  list.  Arguments  for  and 
against  a  late  date.  First  Peter  also  practical, 
rather  than  theological.  Genuineness  generally 
conceded.  The  Second  Epistle  much  discussed. 
Its  Petrine  authorship  questioned.  Indications 
which  point  to  Peter  as  the  author.  The  Epistle 
of  Jude.  Much  like  a  part  of  Second  Peter. 
Characteristic  features.  Question  of  authorship 
must  be  left  unsettled 181 


Contents  17 

XXIV 

THE  WRITINGS  OF  PAUL 

PAGE 

Paul  the  dominant  factor  in  the  Apostolic  Church. 
First  Thessalonians  generally  accepted  as  Pauline. 
Written  from  Corinth  about  52.  Second  Thessa- 
lonians and  Paul's  view  of  the  second  advent  con- 
sidered. Galatians  one  of  four  undisputed  epis- 
tles. Opposes  the  Judaistic  tendency.  First  Cor- 
inthians soon  followed.  Special  features.  Sec- 
ond Corinthians  a  sequel  to  the  first.  More  of 
Paul's  autobiography  here.  Romans  undisputed, 
except  the  closing  chapters  by  a  few.  Tone  not 
polemical,  but  irenic.  A  full  statement  of  Chris- 
tian doctrine.  The  last  two  chapters.  Colossians 
and  Philemon  must  be  taken  together.  The  story 
of  Onesimus.  The  "  Colossian  Heresy  "  and  the 
purpose  of  the  epistle.  Evidence  of  Pauline  au- 
thorship. Ephesians  written  about  the  same  time 
from  Rome.  The  letter  probably  general.  Philip- 
pians  uncertain  as  to  time  of  writing.  Personal 
letter  of  the  apostle.  The  Pastoral  letters.  Paul's 
authorship  widely  denied.  Dr.  McGiffert's  state- 
ment. Arguments  for  the  Pauline  authorship. 
Statement  of  Dr.  P.  J.  Gloag igo 

XXV 

THE  EPISTLE  TO   THE  HEBREWS 

Importance  not  adequately  emphasized.  Distinctive 
characteristics.  The  object  of  the  epistle.  The 
Tabernacle,  not  the  Temple,  referred  to  in  the  dis- 
cussion of  Old  Testament  ceremonials.     Author- 


1 8  Contents 

PAGE 

ship  impossible  to  determine.  Statement  of  Dr. 
McGiffert.  Not  written  simply  to  the  Jews.  Con- 
ceptions different  from  Paul's,  yet  akin  to  them. 
Emphasizes  in  a  special  manner  the  place  of  the 
historic  Moses   208 

XXVI 

THE  WRITINGS  OF  JOHN 
First  Epistle  and  Fourth  Gospel  recognized  as  com- 
ing from  same  writer.  Second  and  Third  John 
conceded  to  be  by  the  same  writer.  But  Second 
John  and  First  John  reveal  the  same  authorship. 
Dr.  Marcus  Dods  on  the  Johanine  authorship  of 
the  Gospel.  Prof.  Sandy's  statement.  Ezra 
Abbott  on  the  Gnostics'  acceptance  of  John.  In- 
ternal evidence  considered.  Independence  of  the 
Fourth  Gospel  shown.  John  necessarily  condensed 
accounts  of  Christ's  teachings.  John's  method  of 
argument.  Dr.  McGiffert  on  the  importance  of 
this  Gospel.  The  Book  of  Revelation.  Argu- 
ments for  early  and  later  dates.  Arguments  for 
and  against  John's  authorship.  Discussion  by 
Canon  Westcott.  Revelation  largely  a  sealed  book. 
Deals  with  conditions  and  principles,  rather  than 
dates  and  individuals.  Commentary  by  Rev.  J. 
S.  Hughes.  Will  have  a  more  satisfactory  place  in 
the  future  of  the  Church's  study  of  the  Bible 216 

XXVII 

THE  PLACE  OF  MIRACLES 

Extreme  critics  deny  the  supernatural.  Important 
to  remember  the  actual  condition  of  the  masses  of 
the    people    in    Bible    times.    The    kindergarten 


Contents  19 

PAGE 

method  in  Pedagogy.  Miracles  educational  rather 
than  apologetic.  The  philosophy  of  miracle  stated. 
Illustrated  in  book  of  Jonah.  Our  Lord  defines 
the  place  and  limitations  of  miracle.  Vigorous 
discussion  by  Dr.  Bruce.  Statement  of  Dr. 
Purves.  Miracles  have  not  lost  their  apologetic 
value.  The  miracles  of  the  incarnation  and  resur- 
rection the  bedrock  on  which  Evengelical  Chris- 
tendom rests 232 

XXVIII 

CHRIST  AND  THE  CRITICS 

What  of  Christ's  authority  regarding  critical  ques- 
tions? Was  not  His  purpose  to  sanction  any 
special  theory  of  authorship.  Insisted  upon  the 
divine  authority  in  the  truth.  Statement  of  Rob- 
ertson Smith.  Christ's  reference  involves  general 
reliability  of  the  record.  Mistake  to  apply  Christ's 
authority  where  He  did  not.  He  set  much  of  the 
Old  Testament  aside,  as  no  longer  binding.  The 
eternal  truth  must  be  discriminated  from  the  tem- 
porary teachings.  Men  must  be  individual  judges 
of  these  things.  Facts  regarding  opposite  inter- 
pretations of  the  same  teaching,  as  regards  slav- 
ery, or  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  Agreement 
growing 240 

XXIX 

THE  PROBLEM  OF  INSPIRATION 

Ex-President  Woolsey  on  the  subject.  Dr.  De- 
Witt's  comments  on  the  difficulty  of  the  discus- 
sion.   Theories  about  the  sun  do  not  affect  its 


ao  Contents 

PAGE 

shining.  Recent  hesitation  to  define  such  facts  as 
atonement  and  inspiration.  Definite  theory  not 
necessary.  President  Patton  on  the  importance 
of  recognizing  Bible  material  as  historically  re- 
liable aside  from  the  theory  of  inspiration.  The 
claim  of  the  Bible  to  be  the  revelation  of  God  to 
men.  The  writers  "  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost," 
but  marked  by  human  limitations.  Various  ma- 
terials in  the  book.  Not  everything  inspired  of 
God,  as  the  devil's  lies.  Some  parts  more  import- 
ant than  others.  No  two  manuscripts  alike.  Dis- 
crepancies unimportant  as  a  rule.  The  Bible  as 
we  have  it  sufficient  to  accomplish  the  purpose  of 
God.  General  reliability  of  the  record  recognized. 
Commentators  emphasize  the  colouring  of  partic- 
ular words  as  essential  to  the  truth.  Dr.  De- 
Witt's  helpful  discussion.  Discovers  scope  of 
inspiration  by  noting  character  of  revelation.  His 
definition  accepted  as  adequate 247 

XXX 

THE  ABIDING  WORD  OF  GOD 

Two  hundred  years  of  criticism.  Two  hundred 
years  of  Bible  translation,  dissemination  and  study. 
Remarkable  instance  of  the  saving  power  of  the 
Bible.  The  evangelical  faith  results  from  its  free 
and  full  use.  It  is  the  Bread  of  Life.  It  "  liveth 
and  abideth  forever  " 263 


Bible  Criticism  and  the 
Average  Man 


THE  AVERAGE   MAN 

THE  average  man  is  the  large  factor  in 
any  problem  which  involves  the  human 
race.  Any  theory  must  find  acceptance 
with  him  before  it  can  have  a  permanent  place 
in  the  general  thought  of  men.  The  critic  is  a 
specialist.  He  comes  as  an  expert  to  his  task. 
Thus  far  the  publications  which  present  the  sub- 
ject of  Bible  Criticism  are  largely  technical  in 
character  and  intended  for  those  who  are  scholars 
trained  sufficiently  to  follow  the  specialist.  Hence 
the  average  man  has  remained  in  the  outer  court 
of  the  temple,  realizing  that  a  discussion  has  been 
continued  for  some  years  regarding  the  Scrip- 
tures, but  not  having  clear  or  definite  concep- 
tions as  to  the  character  of  the  discussion  or  its 
results. 

Perhaps  this  important  fact  has  not  been  suf- 
ficiently recognized  by  the  specialist.    It  is  doubt- 
less proper  to  concede  a  certain  degree  of  author- 
az 


0.2    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

ity  to  an  expert  just  because  he  is  an  expert, 
but  Dr.  W.  J.  Beecher  is  certainly  correct  when 
he  insists  that  "  in  matters  of  permanent  knowl- 
edge an  expert  does  not  expect  to  be  believed 
permanently  on  the  ground  of  his  being  an  ex- 
pert. He  is  under  obligations  to  put  it  into  the 
power  of  men  who  are  not  experts  to  test  his 
conclusions.  He  may  do  this  ( i )  by  the  practical 
results  he  accomplishes.  We  who  ride  in  trolley 
cars  and  use  telephones  and  read  by  electric  light 
have  no  doubt  that  the  experts  in  electricity  have 
studied  to  some  purpose.  Or  he  may  (2)  do  it 
by  placing  the  reasons  before  their  minds  in  such 
shape  that  they  can  understand  them.  In  one  of 
these  two  ways  the  expert  who  claims  to  have 
discovered  something  for  the  benefit  of  mankind 
must,  within  a  reasonable  time,  make  his  claim 
good.  The  public  will  give  him  time,  will  take 
him  provisionally  for  awhile  at  his  own  estimate 
of  himself.  But  we  cannot  forever  accept  him 
as  a  mere  matter  of  tradition.  He  must  give  us 
proofs  level  to  our  understanding,  or  he  will  be 
consigned  to  the  limbo  to  which  obsolete  tradi- 
tions go." 

This  is  all  the  more  obligatory  in  view  of  the 
fact  that  the  average  man  discovers  the  specialists 
failing  to  agree  with  such  unanimity  as  is  nec- 
essary to  inspire  confidence  in  the  mind  of  the 
general  public.  When  Prof.  Roentgen  an- 
nounced the  discovery  of  the  X  ray,  every  special- 
ist who  experimented  along  the  lines  of  the  dis- 


The  Average  Man  23 

covery  was  able  to  verify  the  claims  of  the  dis- 
coverer,  and   the   unanimous   testimony   of   all 
these  specialists  left  no  doubt  in  the  public  mind, 
even  before  the  people  began  to  experience   the 
blessings  which  the  discovery  has  brought  to  men. 
But  when  Kuenen  puts  forth  one  theory  of  Bible 
Criticism  and  Wellhausen  refuses  to  accept  it, 
putting  a  different  one  of  his  own  in  its  place, 
then  the  average  man  hesitates  to  accept  either 
view.     Prof.  Addis  one  of  the  latest  critics,  in 
his  book  The  Documents  of  The  Hexatench,  says 
of  the  views  of  Dr.  Staerk,  another  critic :  "  He 
heaps  conjecture  upon  conjecture,  and  they  re- 
main mere  conjectures  notwithstanding  his  con- 
stant assurance  that  this  is  '  clear '  and  that  is 
'without  doubt'"  (p.  17).    In  the  face  of  such 
differences  of  opinion  among  the  specialists  them- 
selves, the  average  man  cannot  resist  the  feeling 
that  their  findings  may  not  be  marked  by  great 
reliability.    The  Christian  world  has  been  patient 
with  modern    critical    scholars.     The  few  con- 
,  spicuous  exceptions  only  mark  the  fact.    The  de- 
sire for  liberty  in  research  is  general.    We  desire 
all  the  light  possible.     The  spirit  of  toleration 
is  increasing.     But  we  do  not  forget  that  san- 
guine people  are  liable  to  push  a  new  idea  for 
more  than  it  is  worth,  and  press  a  new  method 
beyond  what  it  will  bear.   Therefore  if  the  prod- 
uct of  the  critic's  work  shall  involve  a  difficulty 
at  the  point  of  discriminating  between  specula- 
tion and  demonstration,  the  critic  must  see  the 


24  Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

reasonableness  of  the  hesitation  with  which  the 
average  man  considers  his  views. 

The  critics  have  been  over-confident  about 
their  following,  assuming  a  much  greater  number 
in  that  following  than  the  facts  justify,  mainly 
because  many  who  do  not  agree  with  their  views 
have  not  opposed  them,  but  have  been  tolerant  in 
the  desire  for  liberty  of  research.  We  have  a 
significant  illustration  in  a  sermon  by  Dr.  Henry 
van  Dyke  on  The  Bible  As  It  Is,  in  which  he 
gives  full  expression  to  the  spirit  of  toleration, 
but  says :  ''As  yet  I  have  seen  no  good  reason 
for  thinking  that  Moses  was  not  the  author  of 
the  Pentateuch,  although  there  are  certain  por- 
tions of  it  which  he  could  hardly  have  written, 
for  example  the  account  of  his  own  death  and 
burial;  and  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah  seem  to  me 
to  be  well  enough  accounted  for  by  the  supposi- 
tion of  a  single  author  with  two  different  styles. 
These  opinions  may  be  due  to  ignorance,  but 
many  of  the  conclusions  of  the  higher  criticism 
present  themselves  to  such  literary  judgment  as 
I  possess  in  the  same  aspect  of  inconclusive  dog- 
matism as  the  theories  of  those  who  would  per- 
suade us  that  the  poems  of  Homer  were  written 
by  another  man  of  the  same  name,  and  that 
Francis  Bacon  was  the  author  of  Shakespear's 
plays." 

There  is  another  consideration  which  Mr.  Glad- 
stone urges  in  his  book  The  Impregnable  Rock 
of  Holy  Scripture.    He  reminds  us  that  the  Scrip- 


The  Average  Man  25 

ture  writings  are  something  more  than  Hebrew 
and  Greek  words,  and  that  they  are  used  with  a 
great  purpose,  namely,  to  convey  truth  to  men. 
He  urges  that  men  are  bound  to  judge  the  trust- 
worthiness of  the  writings  according  as  they  real- 
ize the  success  with  which  these  Scriptures  have 
accomplished  their  purpose,  and  adds :  "  Cer- 
tainly I  can  lay  no  claim  to  be  heard  here  more 
than  any  other  person.  Yet  will  I  say  that  any 
man  whose  labour  and  duty  for  several  scores 
of  years  have  included  as  their  central  point  the 
study  of  the  means  of  making  himself  intelligible 
to  the  mass  of  men,  is,  by  just  so  much,  in  a 
better  position  to  judge  what  would  be  the  form 
and  methods  of  speech  proper  for  the  Mosaic 
writer  to  adopt,  than  the  most  perfect  Hebraist 
as  such,  or  the  most  consummate  votary  of 
natural  sciences  as  such."  The  critical  specialist 
is  only  one  of  several  who  have  to  do  with  the 
Bible,  and  the  average  man  has  found  the  book  to 
be  more  than  literature.  To  him  the  voice  of 
authority  comes  from  other  directions  as  well  as 
from  the  student  of  the  literary  composition  of 
the  book.  He  desires  to  be  fair.  He  desires  to 
know  the  actual  product  of  criticism,  but  he  will 
cling  to  long-accepted  views,  confirmed  by  pre- 
cious experience,  until  convincing  evidence  leads 
him  to  see  that  the  new  is  really  better  than  the 
old. 


II 

THE   BIBLE 

IT  has  been  said  there  are  three  classes  of 
books:  the  book  you  read  once,  the  book 
you  read  twice,  and  the  book  you  read  every 
year.  But  there  is  one  book  which  remains  in  a 
class  by  itself,  to  which  many  thousands  resort 
morning  by  morning,  and  evening  by  evening,  for 
guidance  and  inspiration,  for  comfort  and  peace. 
Other  books,  the  greatest  among  them,  exhaust 
their  message;  but  each  generation  returns  to 
this  book  and  finds  it  has  more  to  say.  Immanuel 
Kant  wrote  to  a  friend :  "  You  do  well  in  that 
you  base  your  peace  and  piety  on  the  Gospels, 
for  in  the  Gospels,  in  the  Gospels  alone,  is  the 
source  of  deep  spiritual  truths,  after  reason  has 
measured  out  its  whole  territory  in  vain."  And 
he  further  quotes  Goethe  as  saying :  "  Let  the 
world  progress  as  much  as  it  likes;  let  all 
branches  of  human  research  develop  to  the  very 
utmost ;  nothing  will  take  the  place  of  the  Bible." 
Sir  John  Herschel  wrote :  "  All  human  discov- 
eries seem  to  be  made  only  for  the  purpose  of 
confirming  more  and  more  strongly  the  truths 
contained  in  the  sacred  Scriptures."  General 
Grant  urged  our  people  to  "hold  fast  to  the 
a6 


The  Bible  Q.^ 

Bible  as  the  sheet  anchor  of  our  liberties,"  add- 
ing :  "  Write  its  precepts  on  your  hearts  and  prac- 
tice them  in  your  lives.  To  the  influence  of  this 
book  we  are  indebted  for  the  progress  made  in 
true  civilization,  and  to  this  we  must  look  as 
our  guide  in  the  future." 

To  the  Christian  the  explanation  of  this  unique 
character  of  the  Bible  is  not  in  the  fact  that  it  is 
the  most  splendid  achievement  in  literature,  not 
that  it  is  the  noblest  and  most  sublime  of  all 
books;  but  it  is  in  the  fact  that  the  Bible  is  the 
revelation  of  God.  We  will  agree  with  Froude 
that  the  book  of  Job  "  will  be  found  at  the  last 
to  tower  above  all  the  poetry  of  the  world ; "  but 
we  also  agree  with  Coleridge  when  he  says :  "  I 
know  the  Bible  is  inspired  because  it  finds  me  at 
greater  depths  of  my  being  than  any  other  book." 
Men  say  God  has  revealed  Himself  by  His  power 
and  plan  in  nature,  and  by  His  providence  in  his- 
tory. He  has  revealed  Himself  in  His  Spirit  in 
the  life  of  the  Church  and  of  individual  believers. 
He  has  inspired  the  books  of  devotion  which 
quicken  the  spirit  of  consecration,  and  has  illu- 
mined the  thoughts  of  sage  and  seer  which  shine 
with  abiding  beauty  and  helpfulness.  And  all 
this  is  true;  but  no  man  has  ever  indicated  the 
first  truth  which  God  has  spoken  in  nature,  in 
history,  in  literature  or  in  experience,  which  He 
has  not  spoken  in  the  Bible.  Robertson  Nicol 
says  truly :  "  You  will  find  the  most  beautiful 
thought  ever  suggested  by  the  profoundest  Chris- 


a  8    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

tian  mind  quietly  folded  in  some  word  of  Jesus, 
in  some  argument  of  an  apostle." 

It  is  the  contention  of  Dr.  Robertson  Smith 
that  "  the  Bible  contains  within  itself  a  perfect 
picture  of  God's  gracious  relations  to  man,  and 
that  we  have  no  need  to  go  outside  of  the  Bible 
history  to  know  anything  of  God  and  His  saving 
will  toward  us,  that  the  whole  growth  of  the 
true  religion  up  to  its  perfect  fulness  is  set  before 
us  in  the  record  of  God's  dealings  with  Israel  cul- 
minating in  the  manifestation  of  Jesus  Christ. 
History  has  not  taught  us  that  there  is  anything 
in  true  religion  to  add  to  the  New  Testament. 
We  still  stand  in  the  nineteenth  century  where 
Christ  stood  in  the  first,  or  rather  Christ  stands 
as  high  above  us  as  He  did  above  the  disciples, 
the  perfect  Master,  the  supreme  Head  of  the 
fellowship  of  all  true  religion."  With  light 
streaming  in  on  all  sides  upon  the  human  soul, 
the  fact  that  Dr.  Smith's  statement  stands  un- 
challenged among  evangelical  Christians  at  the 
beginning  of  the  twentieth  century  is  of  profound 
significance.  We  may  not  anticipate  at  this  point 
the  discussion  of  the  development  of  the  truth 
in  the  progressive  unfolding  of  God's  revelation 
to  men.  Through  the  years  it  came  slowly,  in- 
spiring and  explaining  the  evolution  of  man's 
purer  conceptions  of  spiritual  life,  until  in  Christ 
the  revelation  reaches  that  fulness  which  Dr. 
Smith  attributes  to  it.     As  an  earnest,  honest 


The  Bible  a<) 

stud'ent,  he  writes  his  judgment  with  increasing 
confidence. 

Occasionally  some  one  asserts  a  decline  in  the 
influence  of  the  Bible.  On  the  contrary  the  last 
decade  of  the  nineteenth  century  has  witnessed 
a  marvellous  advance  in  the  study  of  this  book. 
In  the  twelve  months  terminating  March  31st, 
1900,  the  total  output  of  the  British  and  Foreign 
Bible  Society  reached  the  amazing  total  of  five 
millions  and  forty-seven  thousand  copies  of  Holy 
Writ,  more  than  half  a  million  in  excess  of  the 
previous  twelve  months.  But  this  society  is  only 
one  of  many.  Never  was  the  demand  for  the 
Bible  as  great  as  to-day.  At  the  beginning  of 
this  century  there  are  over  four  hundred  versions 
of  the  Scriptures  or  some  portion  thereof,  the 
number  rising  in  the  nineteenth  century  from  a 
total  of  fifty-six.  Every  college  of  importance 
now  gives  the  Bible  a  recognized  place  in  its  cur- 
riculum. It  is  in  the  full  blaze  of  the  world's 
light,  and  sheds  the  brightest  light  known  to  men 
from  its  own  sacred  page. 

Wherever  this  Bible  dominates  the  religious 
life  of  men  and  nations  the  best  blessings  have 
multiplied.  It  opens  a  fountain  of  healing  for 
every  human  ill,  strength  for  the  weary  spirit, 
divine  sympathy  for  the  sorrowing,  precious  com- 
fort for  the  bereaved,  and  a  glorious  hope  of  the 
life  everlasting.  It  brings  the  salvation  of  God 
to  sinful  men  through  the  atoning  love  of  Jesus 


30    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

Christ.  It  came  into  the  world  and  touched  all 
its  life  with  transforming  power.  It  has  replaced 
the  art  still  reflected  on  the  walls  of  Pompeii 
with  the  noblest  conceptions  of  the  master's  gen- 
ius. It  found  infanticide  infamously  universal, 
and  has  set  the  child  in  the  very  centre  of  the 
world's  life.  It  found  slavery  rendered  intoler- 
able by  the  cruelty  and  impurity  of  the  master, 
and  not  only  lifted  up  the  slave  to  freedom,  but 
exalted  the  place  of  labour  as  honourable  in  all 
men.  Where  the  very  meaning  of  marriage  was 
destroyed,  it  consecrated  this  holy  institution  as 
most  honourable  and  blessed.  Where  the  Bible 
has  its  place,  righteousness  is  exalted  as  the 
mark  of  true  character  and  the  only  measure  of 
real  success  in  human  life,  while  the  unselfish 
service  of  a  Christ-like  love  is  the  sign  of  God's 
fellowship  with  men. 

Such  is  the  priceless  character  of  the  Bible. 
Nay,  no  adequate  expression  can  be  found  to  de- 
pict its  value  to  our  race.  There  are  those  who 
love  it  with  every  fibre  of  every  heart  string,  and 
who  are  ready  to  devote  their  lives  to  the  end 
that  it  may  be  known  and  read  to  the  uttermost 
part  of  the  earth,  as  the  wisdom  of  God  and  the 
power  of  God  unto  salvation.  It  has  been  sub- 
jected to  the  fiery  test  of  the  crucible,  but,  like 
the  burning  bush  that  Moses  saw,  it  cannot  be 
consumed  because  Jehovah  is  in  the  midst  of  it. 
The  divine  life  is  its  living  spirit.    "  The  words 


The  Bible  31 

that  I  speak  unto  you,"  said  Christ,  "they  are 
spirit  and  they  are  life."  The  light  of  a  blessed 
immortality  shines  from  its  pages  upon  the  way 
everlasting.  The  knowledge  of  it  shall  one  day 
fill  the  earth  as  the  waters  cover  the  sea. 


Ill 

LITERARY  CRITICISM  OF  THE  BIBLE 

THE  Bible  is  literature.  There  is  a  cer- 
tain examination  of  literature  which  is 
called  Criticism.  It  is  not  only  right  but 
necessary  that  the  principles  of  Criticism  be  ap- 
plied to  the  writings  contained  in  the  Bible.  C. 
M.  Mead  in  Christ  and  Criticism,  says :  "  Gen- 
uine Criticism  is  nothing  but  the  search  after 
truth;  and  of  this  there  cannot  be  too  much." 
There  is  a  wide-spread  prejudice  against  what 
is  known  as  "  The  Higher  Criticism,"  but  this 
prejudice  must  not  be  directed  against  the  prin- 
ciples of  Criticism,  for  they  are  necessary  to  all 
intelligent  study  of  literature.  If  there  have  been 
critics  who  have  abused  the  methods  of  sound 
Criticism  and  have  been  arrogant  in  assumptions 
which  have  not  been  justified  by  the  facts,  we 
must  learn  to  discriminate  between  the  legitimate 
and  necessary  Criticism,  with  its  valid  and  valu- 
able results,  and  that  extreme  unwarranted  claim 
of  some  destructive  critics  which  many  earnest 
critics  repudiate. 

Prevalent  usage  of  terms  has  made  a  distinc- 
tion between  Lower  Criticism  and  Higher  Criti- 
cism.    But  as  a  matter  of  fact  practically  all 
32 


Literary  Criticism  of  the  Bible        23 

critics  deal  with  the  whole  problem  of  Criticism, 
and  the  distinctions  are  not  vital  for  the  average 
man  as  he  considers  the  work  of  the  critics. 
Prof.  H.  C.  King,  in  his  Reconstruction  in  The- 
ology, gives  a  good  popular  definition  in  these 
words:  "Higher  Criticism  may  be  defined  as  a 
careful  historical  and  literary  study  of  a  book  to 
determine  its  unity,  age,  authorship,  literary  form 
and  reliability."  In  doing  this,  account  is  taken 
of  the  historical  references  contained  in  the  writ- 
ing, its  style,  any  citations  made  in  it,  quotations 
from  it  found  elsewhere,  the  literary  surround- 
ings, and  linguistic  characteristics.  For  instance, 
the  student  who  knows  the  writings  of  Chaucer 
and  Tennyson  is  able  to  say  of  any  production 
of  English  whether  it  belongs  in  the  earHer  pe- 
riod or  the  later.  The  considerations  just  men- 
tioned will  enable  him  to  do  this.  The  same 
principles  may  be  applied  to  different  writings  in 
the  Bible  showing  a  different  age  for  composition. 
Varieties  of  evidence  point  out  important  facts 
concerning  the  "  origin,  form  and  value  "  of  the 
different  writings.  Therefore,  in  its  purity.  Criti- 
cism is  an  honest  study  about  the  facts  which 
may  be  discovered  which  throw  light  upon  these 
problems  in  the  Scriptures. 

All  such  facts  should  be  sought,  without  hesi- 
tation and  without  fear.  They  involve  questions 
which  cannot  be  evaded  and  should  not  be.  Prin- 
cipal Fairbaim,  in  his  book  The  Place  of  Christ 
in  Modern  Theology,  says  truly :  "  A  more  in- 


34  Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

timate  knowledge  of  Oriental  man  and  nature, 
due  to  personal  acquaintance  with  them,  has  quali- 
fied scholars  the  better  to  read  and  understand 
the  Semitic  mind.  A  more  accurate  knowledge 
of  ancient  versions,  combined  with  a  more  scien- 
tific archseology,  and  a  clearer  insight  into  the 
intellectual  tendencies  and  religious  methods  of 
the  old  world,  especially  in  their  relation  to 
literary  activity  and  composition,  has  enabled  the 
student  to  apply  new  and  more  certain  canons  to 
all  that  concerns  the  formation  of  books  and 
texts.  The  growth  of  skilled  interpretation,  ex^ 
ercised  and  illustrated  in  many  fields,  has  ac- 
customed men  to  the  study  of  literature  and  his- 
tory together,  showing  how  the  literature  lived 
through  the  people,  and  the  people  were  affected 
by  the  literature ;  and  so  has  trained  men  to  read 
with  larger  eyes  the  books  and  peoples  of  the 
past."  Before  the  days  of  printing,  copyists 
would  often  make  additions,  comments,  insertions 
in  the  original  text.  This  would  be  proved  by 
the  discovery  of  an  earlier  manuscript.  Some- 
times this  would  be  done  ignorantly,  sometimes 
deliberately.  Criticism  has  detected  many  such 
facts,  as  well  as  apocryphal  writings  and  pseudo- 
compositions.  In  many  oriental  and  classical 
writings  Criticism  has  accomplished  very  impor- 
tant results  in  this  sifting  process. 

Yet  when  all  has  been  granted  gladly  to  Criti- 
cism which  is  its  due,  it  must  be  insisted  that 
much  of  its  work  has  been  marked  by  certain 


Literary  Criticism  of  the  Bible        35 

features  of  unreliability  which  should  lead  the 
critics  themselves  to  be  very  modest  in  announ- 
cing results.     Prof.  Briggs,  in    his    book    The 
Bible,  The  Church  and  The  Reason  makes  this 
unwarranted  claim  for  Criticism :    "  You  may  be 
willing  to  take  the  Bible  on  the  authority  of  your 
pastor  or  your  parents,  or  your  friends,  or  the 
Christian  Church.    But  there  are  multitudes  who 
cannot  do  this.    They  want  to  know  by  what  au- 
thority the  Church  claims  chat  the  Bible  is  the 
Word  of  God.     The  Church  has  committed  so 
many  sins  against  truth  and  fact  that  it  is  neces- 
sary for  us  to  know  whether  the  Church  is  in 
error  about  the  Bible,  or  whether  it  is  right. 
How  can  we  know  this  except  by  Criticism  ? " 
A  fair  answer  to  this  contention  is  given  by 
Prof.  A.  C.  Zenos,  in  his  book  The  Elements  of 
The  Higher  Criticism,  in  which  he  says :  "  That 
the  reasoning  in  this  paragraph  is  not  conclusive 
or  valid,  may  be  demonstrated  by  reversing  its 
point  and  noticing  how  applicable  it  is  when  thus 
reversed.    For  example,  let  us  say  *  You  may  be 
willing  to  receive  the  Bible  on  the  authority  of 
experts,  specialists,  scholars,  higher  critics,  but 
there  are  multitudes  who  cannot  do  this;  they 
want  to  know  by  what  authority  higher  critics 
claim  that  the  Bible  is  the  Word  of  God.  Higher 
Criticism  has  committed  so  many     sins    against 
truth  and  fact  that  it  is  necessary  for  us  to  know 
whether  the  Higher  Criticism  is  in  error  about 
the  Bible,  or  whether  it  is  right.    How  can  we 


^6   Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

know  this  except  by  inquiring  of  the  Church, 
the  guardian  of  the  Bible,  its  history  and  na- 
ture ? '  The  fact  is,  neither  this  position,  nor  the 
position  of  Prof.  Briggs,  which  is  not  a  whit 
stronger  than  this,  is  tenable.  The  Bible  com- 
mends itself,  apart  from  Criticism  or  the  author- 
ity of  the  Church,  as  a  source  of  religious  in- 
formation and  inspiration.  Criticism  and  the 
Church  may  increase  or  diminish  the  light  in 
which  the  Bible  is  used,  but  they  are  not  abso- 
lutely necessary,  either  singly  or  combined,  to 
authenticate  the  Bible."  This  is  the  fact  of  vital 
importance.  While  the  Bible  is  literature,  it  is 
more  than  literature.  Its  unique  place  and  au- 
thority, as  noted  in  the  preceding  chapter,  do  not 
rest  in  its  literary  character  alone.  Criticism 
therefore  is  not  of  such  supreme  importance  to 
the  Bible  as  many  critics  would  have  us  think. 

Furthermore  it  remains  to  note  that  many  of 
the  claims  of  the  critics  are  not  marked  By  that 
conclusiveness  of  evidence  which  one  would  ex- 
pect in  view  of  their  confident  assertions.  The 
precarious  character  of  this  study  becomes  evi- 
dent in  the  light  of  two  recent  discussions  con- 
cerning other  literature  than  the  Scriptures.  One 
of  these  is  concerning  the  writings  of  Homer. 
The  German  scholar  Frederick  Augustus  Wolf 
set  forth  the  theory  that  Homer  was  not  the  epic 
poet  of  a  literary  age,  like  Virgil  among  the 
Romans,  that  he  was  really  a  minstrel  who  prob- 
ably composed  only  parts  of  the  noble  poems— 


Literary  Criticism  of  the  Bible        37 

the  Iliad  and  Odyssey — from  the  popular  ballads 
and  tales  of  his  time.  Wolf  held  that  the  writ- 
ings attributed  to  Homer  are  simply  compila- 
tions of  these  numerous  songs  gathered  into  their 
present  form. 

This  Wolfian  theory  has  had  violent  op- 
ponents and  enthusiastic  supporters.  The  av- 
erage man  must  look  to  the  specialists  for  their 
judgment.  Mr.  Gladstone  was  acknowledged  to 
be  one  of  the  greatest  Homeric  students  of  his 
time.  While  recognizing  the  value  of  Wolf's 
emphasis  upon  the  character  of  the  material  in  its 
elemental  forms,  he  urges  that  the  internal  evi- 
dence of  the  poems  points  to  one  author.  He 
insists  that  the  unity  of  tone  and  plan,  and  the 
unequalled  splendour  of  poetic  genius  which  per- 
vades the  whole,  refute  the  theory  that  the  works 
attributed  to  Homer  are  merely  the  skillful  patch- 
work of  later  compilers.  John  Stuart  Blackie, 
in  his  Homer  and  The  Iliad,  says :  "  We  who 
stand  on  the  received  text  have  the  tradition  of 
long  centuries  in  our  favour,  and  not  one  sub- 
stantial reason  against  us.  Possession  in  literary 
as  in  civil  affairs,  is  nine  points  of  the  law;  and 
he  who  wishes  to  shake  an  old  received  docu- 
ment out  of  its  consistency,  must  be  prepared  to 
bring  something  more  weighty  to  bear  against 
it  than  clever  guesses  and  well-devised  possi- 
bilities." Thus  it  becomes  apparent  that  the 
average  man  must  remain  uncertain  as  to  the 
Wolfian  theory  about  Homer,  and  meanwhile  he 


38   Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

will  continue  to  attribute  to  that  great  poet  the 
writings  which  bear  his  name. 

Even  more  significant  is  the  discussion  about 
certain  writings  attributed  to  Thackeray,  not  pub- 
lished as  his  during  his  lifetime.  In  the  month 
of  May,  1899,  the  literary  journal  The  Critic  an- 
nounced a  series  of  eight  papers  of  "  hitherto 
uncollected "  writings  of  various  kinds  from 
Thackeray's  pen,  affirming  that  "  this  treasure 
trove  has  been  collected  and  edited  by  the  well- 
known  Thackeray  expert,  Frederick  S.  Dickson. 
It  is  the  result  of  years  of  research,  and  could 
only  have  been  made  by  one  possessing  special 
knowledge."  In  his  first  installment  of  these  pa- 
pers Mr.  Dickson  acknowledges  his  obligations 
to  Mr.  M.  H.  Spielman,  whom  he  declares  to  be 
the  "  High  Court  of  Appeals  on  these  questions." 
But  in  July  The  Critic  published  a  letter  from 
this  same  Mr.  Spielman,  who  wrote :  "  I  think 
it  my  duty  to  point  out  to  you  the  absolutely  un- 
trustworthy character  of  the  papers "  of  Mr. 
Dickson.  "  In  spite  of  your  announcement  that 
he  is  one  of  three  or  four  persons  familiar  with 
Thackeray's  unidentified  contributions  to  Punch, 
I  beg  leave  to  declare  that  Mr.  Dickson  is  making 
only  very  infelicitous  guesses  at  them." 

Mr.  Spielman  then  proceeds  to  establish  his 
claim  by  showing  that  he  had  access  to  the  pay- 
rolls of  Punch  and  had  verified  the  real  writers  of 
the  articles.  He  insisted  that  "  out  of  ten  pages  " 
of  Mr.  Dickson's  papers  "  more  than  four,  con- 


Literary  Criticism  of  the  Bible        39 

taining  seven  gross  blunders,  are  totally  apocry- 
phal in  character."  The  Critic  discontinued  the 
publication  of  Mr.  Dickson's  articles,  and  in  an 
editorial  entitled  "  When  Doctors  Disagree,"  said 
in  part :  "  An  investigator  writing  at  a  distance 
from  such  first  sources  of  information  as  the 
records  in  the  office  of  Punch  was  not,  of 
course,  in  a  position  to  speak  with  any  final  au- 
thority concerning  these  unidentified  contribu- 
tions." But  suppose  we  were  to  apply  that  state- 
ment to  the  theories  of  the  critics  about  the 
Bible!  They  are  many  centuries  away  from 
their  first  sources. 

In  the  light  of  these  two  recent  discussions 
no  thoughtful  man  can  feel  very  confident  about 
accepting  critical  theories  which  are  not  thor- 
oughly established.  When  we  turn  to  such  an- 
cient writings  as  the  Scriptures,  it  becomes  ap- 
parent that  if  the  critics  do  not  agree,  they  can- 
not expect  others  to  be  zealous  to  follow.  Not 
only  so,  but  we  are  familiar  in  our  own  litera- 
ture with  the  fact  that  one  man  has  produced 
such  a  variety  of  material  as  to  upset  many  prin- 
ciples of  Criticism  when  applied  to  those  writings. 
For  instance,  no  critic  who  might  be  given  a 
complete  set  of  the  works  of  James  Russell 
Lowell,  all  unknown  to  him,  could  consistently 
declare  The  Bigelow  Papers  and  The  Vision  of 
Sir  Lminfal  were  written  by  the  same  man.  But 
we  know  they  were.  Or  if  we  took  a  historic 
drama  of  Shakespeare,  where  we  know  Beaumont 


40  Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

entered  into  composite  authorship  with  the  great 
dramatist,  what  critic  would  confidently  attempt 
the  task  of  declaring  the  separate  writings  of 
each?  Mr.  Gladstone's  Hterary  style  at  eighty 
was  quite  different  from  that  which  marked  his 
writings  at  thirty.  Criticism  would  hesitate  to 
admit  that,  according  to  its  principles,  one  man 
had  written  both  products  from  his  pen.  It  is 
not  intended  to  under-rate  the  value  of  literary 
criticism.  We  have  emphasized  its  rightful  and 
necessary  place  in  all  study  of  literature.  But  it 
is  a  precarious  science  at  best,  and  ought  to  be 
prosecuted  with  great  caution  by  men  who  will 
be  conservative  in  announcing  their  judgments  to 
the  world. 


IV 

A  LESSON   IN   CONFIDENCE 

EVERY  transition  time,  during  which  the 
Church  passes  from  an  older  view  of  the 
Bible  to  a  new  and  different  one,  has 
been  marked  by  dangers  against  which  we  need 
to  guard.  There  is  great  danger  that  the  advo- 
cate of  the  new  will  be  led  into  extravagant  re- 
action against  the  old.  This  tendency  betrays  the 
failure  of  its  victims  to  realize  that  the  main  busi- 
ness of  the  new  is  not  to  destroy,  but  to  fulfil. 
Then  the  traditionalist  is  in  danger  of  not  being 
open-minded  toward  any  truth  which  may  come 
to  light.  The  ultra  conservative  is  as  harmful 
as  the  ultra  radical.  Both  hinder  the  progress 
of  truth.  Therefore  there  is  great  need  of  pa- 
tience while  earnest  students  are  pushing  their 
inquiries  along  the  lines  of  research  which  will 
help  to  the  final  solution  of  the  problem.  The 
thinking  world  has  just  gone  through  such  an 
experience,  which  is  still  so  near  us  as  to  be 
fresh  in  the  minds  of  many.  During  the  nine- 
teenth century  a  conflict  was  waged  in  the  realm 
of  physical  science  because  of  its  supposed  con- 
tradictions of  Bible  teachings  which  touched  upon 
its  sphere. 

41 


^1   Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

There  were  three  classes  of  people  engaged  in 
the  discussion.  First,  some  unchristian  scien- 
tists; second,  some  unscientific  Christians;  and 
third,  some  scientific  Christians.  The  solution  of 
the  problem  was  impossible  by  either  the  first  or 
second  of  these  classes.  Each  hindered  the  work 
as  much  as  the  other.  They  were  dominated  by 
prejudices  and  fears.  On  the  one  hand  the  new 
teachings  in  geology  and  biology  were  con- 
demned as  the  work  of  the  devil,  their  propaga- 
tion was  considered  dangerous  to  the  faith,  and 
the  minister  who  betrayed  any  sympathy  with 
them  was  branded  as  a  heretic.  If  the  world  was 
not  made  in  days  of  twenty- four  hours  each,  and 
if  man  had  come  to  his  physical  estate  by  an  evo- 
tutionary  process,  then  the  Bible  must  be  given 
up  and  inspiration  is  an  illusion.  Thus  many  in- 
sisted not  very  long  ago.  On  the  other  hand  ex- 
tremists in  the  study  of  physical  science  were 
carried  away  by  their  new  and  partial  discover- 
ies. Some  declared  that  God  had  no  longer  a 
place  in  His  world,  that  natural  evolution  ex- 
plained everything,  that  the  Bible  was  krgely 
legend  and  tradition,  and  that  the  new  era  of 
light  had  dawned  upon  a  belated  world.  An 
agnostic  philosophy  was  developed  upon  the  basis 
of  this  naturalistic  physical  science,  and  with 
amusing  assumptions  of  its  sufficiency  made  its 
claims  upon  the  allegiance  of  thinking  men. 

But  facts  are  stubborn  things  and  they  cut 
both  ways  like  a  two-edged  sword.     The  third 


A  Lesson  in  Confidence 


43 


class,  made  up  of  scientific  Christians,  were  busy- 
studying  facts.  They  neither  allowed  prejudice 
to  develop  fear  regarding  the  safety  of  the  old, 
nor  undue  enthusiasm  regarding  the  importance 
of  the  new.  They  realized  that  some  great  facts 
were  settled  and  would  remain.  Facts  in  Chris- 
tian experience,  which  had  become  universal  to 
the  Christian  consciousness,  they  knew  no  dis- 
coveries in  physical  science  could  destroy.  They 
were  assured  that  new  truth  would  accord  with 
old  truth.  They  saw  that  the  great  teaching  of 
the  Bible  was  not  regarding  the  length  of  time 
consumed  in  creating  the  world,  nor  regarding 
the  particular  method  adopted  by  the  Creator 
in  the  creation  of  man ;  but  was  the  teaching  that 
God  is  the  Creator  of  all  things,  whatever  the 
method  employed.  Any  new  light  upon  the 
method  would  not  affect  the  fact  of  God's  pres- 
ence and  power  in  creation,  as  already  familiar 
to  the  Christian  thought.  This  reassuring  po- 
sition was  resisted  by  many  who  considered  it 
dangerous,  but  the  study  of  the  facts  continued, 
with  the  result  that  the  extremists  on  both  sides 
are  no  longer  heeded.  Science  has  taught  us 
certain  new  interpretations  of  Scripture,  and 
Scripture  holds  its  vital  essentials  against  the  un- 
warranted assumptions  of  science  in  such  in- 
stances "  falsely  so  called." 

This  episode  is  like  unto  others  which  have 
occurred  in  the  past.  It  is  now  being  repeated 
in  the  realm  of  Bible  Criticism.    The  three  classes 


44   Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

are  here  also.  The  extreme  critics  are  ration- 
alistic and  destructive.  They  imagine  they  have 
forever  destroyed  the  divine  revelation  of  God 
and  His  thought  for  men.  The  extreme  tra- 
ditionalist is  narrowly  conservative  and  fears  that 
if  the  doctrine  of  inspiration  should  be  modified, 
there  would  be  nothing  left  of  authority  and 
truth.  Neither  of  these  will  bring  us  the  solution 
of  the  problem.  A  third  class  of  Christian  critics 
stands  between  these  extremes.  Some  of  them 
are  more  conservative,  others  more  liberal;  but 
all  of  them  confidently  assert  allegiance  to  the 
great  teachings  of  Scripture  which  are  vital  to 
Evangelical  Christianity,  and  insist  that  what- 
ever modification  of  views  may  result  from  Criti- 
cism, nothing  essential  to  true  Christianity  can 
fail  of  permanency.  The  extreme  critic  will  be 
disappointed  to  discover  that  he  has  gone  too  far. 
The  extreme  traditionalist  will  be  surprised  to 
discover  that  truth  is  something  larger  and 
stronger  than  he  had  supposed,  and  the  Church 
of  Christ  will  move  forward  welcoming  all  the 
light  the  years  may  bring. 

Surely  this  lesson  should  not  fail  of  earnest 
application  on  the  part  of  all  Christians.  Men 
were  as  much  alarmed  about  the  doctrine  of  cre- 
ation as  they  now  are  about  the  doctrine  of  in- 
spiration. The  question  of  authority  was  back  of 
that  as  it  is  back  of  this.  It  is  not  to  the  point  to 
say  we  are  now  facing  a  more  serious  problem. 
The  principle  is  the  same  in  both  cases.    If  more 


A  Lesson  in  Confidence  45 

vital  truth  be  involved  in  the  present  discussion, 
the  more  certainly  will  the  outcome  be  the  clearer 
shining  of  such  truth.  We  are  far  stronger  to- 
day in  our  new  interpretation  of  the  Bible-teach- 
ingf  about  creation  than  our  fathers  were,  be- 
cause while  the  essential  recognition  of  God  as 
Creator  is  unchanged,  the  appreciation  of  His 
method  has  made  luminous  the  fact  of  divine  im- 
manence in  the  world  as  it  was  never  understood 
or  taught  before.  Just  as  surely,  if  a  new  view 
of  inspiration  should  result  from  the  evidence 
which  may  some  day  win  recognition,  as  it  will 
if  it  be  valid,  the  outcome  will  be  a  more  vital 
appreciation  of  God's  method  of  revealing  truth 
to  men,  and  a  stronger  faith  in  the  eternal  veri- 
ties which  bind  the  immortal  soul  to  the  living 
Lord. 


HONOUR  TO  HONOURABLE  CRITICS 

THE  average  man  desires  to  be  fair.  This 
is  not  always  easy.  One  may  readily 
concede  candour  and  honesty  of  pur- 
pose to  a  critic  who  is  a  rationalist  and  makes  no 
claim  to  be  a  Christian.  He  looks  upon  the 
Scriptures  much  as  the  Christian  looks  upon  the 
Koran  or  the  Vedas.  But  it  is  more  difficult  to 
be  fair  to  the  critic  who  is  an  Evangelical  Chris- 
tian and  yet  goes  far  in  the  direction  of  the  views 
of  the  extreme  critics  who  are  avowed  Unitarians 
or  Agnostics.  It  is  difficult  to  divide  between  a 
man's  general  attitude  toward  the  Word  of  God 
and  his  critical  theories.  But  a  very  important 
duty  rests  upon  the  Christian  Church  at  this  time 
just  at  this  point  in  the  critical  movement.  It  \i 
necessary  for  us  to  be  thoroughly  fair  to  all 
classes  of  Christian  critics.  We  may  believe  that 
certain  Christian  scholars  betray  in  their  writings 
a  drift  toward  naturalism  which  makes  their 
teachings  dangerously  akin  to  the  destructive  ra- 
tionalism of  men  like  Kuenen;  but  so  long  as 
there  can  be  no  doubt  of  the  attitude  of  these 
men  toward  the  great  fundamental  truths  of 
Christianity,  we  must  recognize  their  sincerity  of 
46 


Honour  to  Honourable  Critics        47 

motive  and  honesty  of  purpose,  and  above  all  be 
assured  that  their  allegiance  to  these  fundamen- 
tals will  hold  them  to  such  an  attitude  of  mind 
and  heart  toward  the  critical  problems  as  will 
lead  them  toward  the  truth,  rather  than  away 
from  it. 

In  this  class  of  men  must  be  placed  such  names 
as  those  of  Dr.  Robertson  Smith,  Dr.  George 
Adam  Smith  and  Dr.  Driver,  of  Great  Britain, 
and  Professors  Briggs,  Francis  Brown,  McGif- 
fert,  and  Dr.  Henry  Preserved  Smith,  of  Amer- 
ica. A  recent  utterance  of  Professor  G.  A.  Smith, 
at  the  Edinburgh  Sabbath  Morning  Fellowship 
Union,  is  indicative  of  the  faith  of  this  group 
of  critics.  In  that  address  Dr.  Smith  said :  "  Bib- 
lical Criticism  has  been  indulged  in  within  the 
last  generation  with  a  vigour  and  a  freedom  that 
were  never  known  before.  And  we  have  to  ask 
ourselves.  What  is  the  loss  of  it,  or  what  is  the 
gain?  One  might  answer  this  question  by  ex- 
amining the  history  we  have,  and  especially  of 
Europe,  and  noting  how  it  has  been  the  Bible, 
and  the  Bible  alone,  which  has  cleansed  the  social 
life,  inspired  new  nations  to  independence,  which 
has  built  the  home,  which  has  perfected  the  be- 
ginnings of  education,  which  has  brought  health 
to  art  and  literature,  which  has  enlightened  the 
ignorant,  ennobled  the  humble,  and  given  the 
lonely  man  power  to  stand  alone  for  truth  and 
justice,  and  which,  above  all,  has  inspired  a 
power  to  every  century,  given  it  an  energy  and  a 


48    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

hope  to  struggle  for  truth  which  nothing  else 
could  possibly  have  endowed  it  with. 

"That  has  been  the  work  of  the  Bible. 
It  is  not  an  instrument  that  has  not  been 
tried.  It  has  been  tried  during  nineteen 
centuries  of  progress,  and  never  once  has  it 
lost  its  edge  during  that  time.  The  criti- 
cism of  to-day  is  not  directed  to  the  historical 
trustworthiness  of  the  Bible,  so  much  as  to  its 
moral  validity,  and  this  subject  gives  rise  to  dif- 
ficulties and  to  doubts.  We  have  to  say  the  so- 
lution of  this  moral  problem  is  to  be  found  within 
the  pages  of  the  Bible  itself.  God  has  granted 
in  His  Sermon  on  the  Mount  that  God's  revela- 
tion must  be  a  progressive  revelation.  Do  not  let 
us  do  the  Bible  the  childish  injustice  of  judging 
it  by  things  which  the  spirit  of  the  Bible  shows 
its  great  victory  to  be  in  outgrowing  and  de- 
feating them.  Do  not  let  us  condemn  the  Bible 
for  practices  which  we  find  its  greatest  prophets 
themselves  condemning.  Let  us  rather  measure 
it  by  the  divine  unity  of  ethical  purpose  which 
runs  through  it  from  the  first  to  last,  which  never 
fails  through  age  after  age,  and  which  proves 
itself  to  be  the  work  of  God,  the  Father  of  our 
Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ.  There  is  dif- 
ficulty about  the  question  as  to  how  far  the  mir- 
acle proved  the  Word  divine.  I  would  have  you 
see  that  while  our  Lord  wrought  the  miracle,  he 
rebuked  those  who  followed  him  for  the  miracle 


Honour  to  Honourable  Critics        49 

only.  It  is  the  Word,  and  its  power  to  give  life 
to  the  soul,  that  is  the  miracle. 

"  What  is  it  that  gives  this  Word  its  power  ? 
It  is  not  the  moral  idea  that  it  lays  bare  to  us.  It 
is  not  in  the  showing  of  the  two  worlds  which 
expose  the  necessity  of  a  moral  choice  between 
them  and  the  warfare  involved  in  that  choice. 
But  the  divine  essence  of  the  Bible  consists  in 
this — the  marvellous  story,  how  it  tells  us  that 
that  moral  warfare  of  ours  is  shared  by  God 
Himself,  that  the  divine  nature  descended  into 
that  warfare,  that  it  bears  the  agony  of  strife — 
nay,  the  shame  and  the  curse  of  it ! — all  for  man's 
salvation.  In  the  Old  Testament,  God  is  repre- 
sented not  as  judicial  righteousness,  but  as 
righteousness  militant  and  suffering.  For  our 
salvation  He  descends  from  heaven,  and  by  His 
love  and  His  pity  redeemed  us.  That  love  and 
pity  were  vicarious.  The  human  heart  is  scarcely 
capable  of  understanding  the  height  and  the 
depth  of  the  task  as  undertaken  by  our  Lord,  by 
the  divine  and  perfect  love  itself. 

"  These  are  the  prophecies  in  the  Old  Test- 
ament of  the  Incarnation  that  we  read  of 
in  the  New.  That  is  the  preparation  for 
the  appearance  of  the  Son  of  God  in  our 
flesh,  our  weakness,  tempted  in  all  points 
as  we  are,  bearing  our  sickness,  carrying  our  sor- 
rows, and  finally,  as  St.  Peter  tells  us,  bearing  in 
His  own  Body  our  own  sins  upon  the  tree.    Be- 


JO   Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

cause  the  Bible  alone  of  all  books  in  the  world  has 
that  story  of  divine  love  to  tell,  v^e  knov^  the  Bible 
to  be  the  Word  of  God.  Not  that  it  fits  the  older 
theories  of  inspiration,  but  that,  independently  of 
all  human  theories  of  inspiration,  it  carries  home 
to  the  hearts  and  the  consciences  and  the  souls  of 
sinful  men,  that  otherwise  would  remain  in  sin 
but  for  this  strange  and  almost  incredible  story 
of  God's  love,  God's  sacrifice  and  agony  for  them. 
It  therefore  carries  that  story  home  to  their  hearts 
and  souls,  needing  no  proof  for  itself,  appealing 
only  in  its  own  strength.  That  is  why  the  Bible 
shall  always  be  the  indispensable  force  to  man's 
salvation,  the  one  so  unique  and  conspicuous,  the 
great  divine  power  for  man's  salvation  in  the 
ministry  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Study  your  Bibles 
for  this  alone  and  believe  in  it  because  it  gives  to 
you  this  naked  truth  of  God's  love." 

This  quotation  is  justified  in  its  length  by  the 
importance  of  the  occasion  for  its  use  here.  It 
is  a  burning  utterance  from  the  soul  of  a  mart 
whose  spiritual  discernment  of  truth  and  power 
of  consecrated  life  every  man  knows.  He  is  the 
legitimate  spokesman  of  the  company  of  liberal 
Christian  critics  to  whom  reference  has  been 
made.  Every  one  of  the  men  mentioned,  and 
others  of  their  school,  will  heartily  endorse  every 
word  of  this  utterance.  The  fact  is  that  one  of 
our  strongest  grounds  for  hope  is  in  these  very 
men ;  for  when  such  men,  holding  views  of  liter- 
ary Criticism  which  many  cannot    accept,    still 


Honour  to  Honourable  Critics        51 

stand  upon  such  fundamental  grounds  of  Chris- 
tian faith,  no  man  need  fear  that  the  outcome  of 
this  movement  will  not  be  with  full  possession  of 
every  vital  truth.  It  is  Dr.  Smith's  expectation 
that  a  new  conception  of  inspiration  will  take  the 
place  of  the  old.  Perhaps  it  may  be  so,  but  all 
that  inspiration  gives  us  now  of  eternal  and  sav- 
ing truth  will  still  be  ours.  The  fact  is  that  after 
a  man  has  been  studying  the  extreme  critics  for 
a  time,  and  turns  to  the  writings  of  these  Chris- 
tian men,  he  discovers  a  purpose  to  draw  back 
from  those  extreme  views  and  show  the  reason- 
ableness of  a  more  moderate  position. 

The  student  of  Dr.  McGiffert's  book,  The 
Apostolic  Age,  who  has  studied  nothing  else 
of  Criticism,  is  startled  by  much  of  it,  and 
with  reason.  To  many  his  method  often 
seems  vicious  and  his  positions  unjustified, 
but  his  honesty  of  purpose  cannot  be  ques- 
tioned by  any  fair-minded  man.  When  Dr. 
McGiff ert  says  in  his  preface :  "  My  aim  through- 
out has  been  positive  and  not  negative,  construc- 
tive and  not  destructive,"  men  must  give  him  all 
the  honest  recognition  possible  for  his  own  po- 
sition. And  when  in  that  same  preface  he  places 
himself  on  record  as  convinced  that  "  Second 
Peter  is  the  only  really  pseudonymous  work  in 
the  New  Testament,"  all  his  various  discussions 
of  details  must  be  considered  in  the  light  of  such 
a  general  position.  The  writer  cannot  agree  with 
the  positions  of  these  men  in  many  particulars, 


52   Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

as  will  appear  in  the  discussions  that  follow,  but 
he  knows  them,  he  has  learned  to  love  and  trust 
them,  and  urges  with  profound  conviction  of  the 
vital  importance  of  the  position,  that  the  Chris- 
tian Church  think  kindly  of  them  and  their  work, 
without  fear  of  any  serious  loss  to  the  wholesome 
development  of  the  truth  in  its  changing  forms. 

But  there  is  another  side  to  this  subject,  which 
is  of  equal  importance,  and  one  which  the  liberal 
critics  have  not  sufficiently  recognized.  There  is 
a  school  of  Christian  critics  who  are  more  con- 
servative in  their  attitude  than  that  already  men- 
tioned. These  men  have  been  as  faithful  stu- 
dents as  any.  They  are  such  men  as  Professors 
W.  J.  Beecher,  W.  H.  Green,  A.  C.  Zenos,  How- 
ard Osgood  of  America,  and  Professor  Ramsay 
of  England.  Perhaps  mention  should  be  made 
of  such  men  as  Professors  Bruce  and  Dods,  of 
Scotland,  as  standing  nearer  this  conservative 
element,  than  to  the  liberals.  These  men  know 
the  theories  and  the  results  of  Criticism,  but  they 
do  not  see  their  way  to  go  very  far  with  the  ex- 
treme critics.  They  recognize  the  true  value  of 
literary  and  historical  Criticism  as  applied  to  the 
Bible,  but  they  find  too  much  assumption  in  so 
many  of  the  theories  to  make  it  possible  for  them 
to  give  consent.  They  insist  upon  methods  which 
shall  be  more  scientific  and  less  conjectural  than 
many  of  the  methods  of  the  vast  majority  of  the 
critics.  They  have  not  been  honoured  as  they 
deserve  to  be  by  the  radical  men. 


Honour  to  Honourable  Critics        53 

But  when  the  average  man  comes  to  his 
inquiry  concerning  the  whole  subject,  he  is 
much  impressed  by  the  positions  of  these 
men,  because,  while  they  are  open  to  con- 
viction where  demonstration  appears,  they 
demand  demonstration  of  a  more  convincing 
character  than  much  that  is  now  offered.  Through 
the  years  there  have  been  such  men  withstanding 
the  extreme  views  of  many  critics.  Men  like 
Hengstenberg,  Haevernick,  Keil,  DeWitt  and 
Bissell.  It  is  not  fair  to  them  simply  to  smile  at 
their  small  numbers,  for  minorities  have  some- 
times won  in  the  long  run.  It  may  3^et  be  made 
manifest  that  these  critics  are  holding  the  citadel. 
Let  the  Church  be  slow  to  accept  too  hastily  the 
teachings  of  the  leading  critics  until  it  has  care- 
fully studied  the  reasons  given  by  these  more 
conservative  men  for  not  yielding  much  that  is 
now  claimed.  The  writer  is  sympathetic  with 
the  position  of  these  more  conservative  critics. 
They  have  convinced  him  that  much  of  the  ex- 
treme teaching  of  the  liberals  will  never  have 
an  abiding  place  in  the  thought  of  the  Church. 
He  is  all  the  more  anxious  to  have  the  liberals 
fully  recognized,  for  he  has  no  anxiety  about  the 
outcome  when  all  the  facts  are  measured  for  their 
real  worth.    Honour  to  whom  honour  is  due ! 


VI 

VARIOUS  THEORIES  ABOUT  THE  PENTATEUCH 

THE  Pentateuch  has  been  the  main  battle 
ground  in  the  critical  discussion.  The 
great  subject  of  the  Pentateuch  is  the 
establishment  of  the  Hebrew  theocracy.  Its  cen- 
tral point  is  the  giving  of  the  law  at  Sinai.  All 
that  goes  before  leads  up  to  this,  and  that  which 
comes  after  recounts  the  way  in  which  Israel  was 
schooled  in  the  law  until  Canaan  was  reached. 
Through  many  centuries  the  Mosaic  authorship 
of  the  Pentateuch  was  conceded  by  practically  the 
unanimous  voice  of  Hebrew  and  Christian 
scholarship.  The  exceptions  were  inconspicuous, 
and  need  not  be  considered,  as  they  were  not 
taken  seriously  in  their  own  time.  The  critical 
study  of  the  Scriptures  had  not  begun. 

In  the  year  1651  the  English  deist,  Thomas 
Hobbes,  published  his  Leviathan,  in  which  he 
assailed  the  Mosaic  authorship.  About  the  same 
time,  Spinoza  in  Holland,  and  Richard  Sfinon 
in  France,  advocated  the  same  view  with  varia- 
tions. In  the  year  1707  Vitringa  expressed  the 
opinion  that  Moses  collected  and  supplemented 
earlier  writings  in  composing  the  book  of 
Genesis.  A  few  years  later  Dr.  Reimarus  elab- 
54 


Various  Theories  About  the  Pentateuch    55 

orated  the  same  theory.  The  modern  critical 
movement  really  took  definite  form  in  the  year 
1753,  when  Dr.  Jean  Astruc,  a  French  physician, 
published  a  book  entitled  Conjectures  About  the 
Original  Memoirs  which  Moses  Used  in  Com- 
posing the  Book  of  Genesis.  It  is  to  be  noted 
that  Astruc  considered  Moses  the  author  of  the 
book. 

THE  DOCUMENT  THEORY 

Astruc  argued  that  Moses  compiled  the  book 
of  Genesis  from  pre-existing  materials  because 
of  the  way  the  two  names  for  God — Elohim  and 
Jehovah — are  used.  Many  Bible  students  are 
aware  that  there  are  different  Hebrew  names 
for  God  used  in  the  text,  two  of  them  much  more 
than  the  others.  They  are  El — or  Elohim,  trans- 
lated God  in  the  English,  and  Jah-veh,  vocalized 
into  Jehovah.  There  are  sections  in  Genesis 
where  now  one,  now  another  of  these  terms  is 
used,  and  to  such  an  extent  as  to  suggest  that  the 
sections  were  written  by  different  men,  one  of 
whom,  at  least,  was  familiar  with  but  one  of 
these  names.  Astruc  conjectured  that  Moses 
had  used  twelve  documents,  two  principal  ones 
and  ten  others. 

This  theory  of  Astruc  was  adopted  by  Prof. 
Eichhorn,  of  Goettingen,  who,  however,  pruned 
off  ten  of  the  minor  documents  and  confined  his 
position  to  the  advocacy  of  two.  Some  of  his 
contemporaries,  as  Illgen  and  Gramberg,  advo- 


56   Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

cated  three  documents.  The  supposed  writer  who 
employs  the  name  Elohim  exclusively  was  called 
the  Elohist,  while  the  other  was  known  as  the 
Jehovist.  It  was  further  claimed  that  the  parts 
of  the  Elohist  document  could  be  taken  out  of 
the  narrative  and  that  they  made  a  complete 
record  taken  alone.  The  same  thing  was  claimed, 
though  with  more  hesitation,  for  the  Jehovist 
document.  A  further  ground  for  the  theory  re- 
garding different  earlier  materials  is  the  fact 
that  double  narratives  appear,  as  in  the  twofold 
accounts  of  the  creation  and  of  the  flood.  More- 
over it  was  urged  that  an  evident  diversity  of 
style  marks  the  different  documents,  that  each 
has  its  characteristic  ideas  and  expressions. 

As  already  stated,  this  theory  was  applied  at 
first  only  to  the  book  of  Genesis,  and  did  not  con- 
flict with  the  idea  of  the  Mosaic  authoriship.  It 
was  soon  discovered  that  this  hypothesis  could  be 
applied  to  the  remaining  books  of  the  Pentateuch. 
For  the  first  time,  as  a  consequence,  the  Mosaic 
authorship  was  brought  into  question.  It  was 
plausibly  urged  that  if  the  entire  Pentateuch  was 
compiled  from  pre-existing  materials,  then  the 
compilation  must  have  been  post-Mosaic,  beailfse*'  ^ 
the  materials  included  the  records  of  the  time  of 
Moses.  Let  it  be  noted,  in  passing,  that  even  a 
theory  of  later  compilation  does  not,  of  neces- 
sity, make  impossible  the  intelligent  belief  that 
Moses  himself  collected  the  materials  for  the 
book  of  Genesis,  and  composed  substantially  th^ 


Various  Theories  About  the  Pentateuch    57 

materials  for  the  remaining  books  of  the  Penta- 
teuch. A  documentary  theory  may  be  held  which 
recognizes  Moses  as  the  substantial  author  of 
the  books  which  have  been  identified  with  his 
name. 

THE   FRAGMENT  THEORY 

The  document  theory  proved  quite  too  con- 
servative for  some  of  the  critics.  In  181 5  Dr. 
Vater  gave  out  the  more  startling  theory  that  the 
Pentateuch  consisted  merely  of  a  number  of  frag- 
ments. He  was  endorsed  by  Hartmann  and 
others.  They  held  that  many  sources  were  used 
in  the  compilation.  All  such  headings  as  "  These 
are  the  generations  of  the  heavens  and  of  the 
earth,"  "  This  is  the  law  of  the  trespass  offer- 
ing," "  These  are  the  journeys  of  the  Children  of 
Israel,"  are  claimed  to  indicate  different  frag- 
ments strung  together.  Vater  imagined  a  col- 
lection of  laws  made  at  the  time  of  David  and 
Solomon  to  have  been  the  foundation  of  the 
whole;  that  this  was  the  lost  book  found  in  the 
days  of  Josiah,  its  fragments  being  incorporated 
into  the  book  of  Deuteronomy.  The  rest  of  the 
Pentateuch  he  considered  fragments  of  tradition, 
history  and  law  collected  into  form  between  the 
reign  of  Josiah  and  the  Babylonian  exile.  Even 
DeWette  held  this  theory  for  a  time,  but  re- 
turned to  the  earlier  document  theory. 

Concerning  this  fragment  theory.  Dr.  Wm. 
H.    Green    says :    "  Admit    the     legitimacy    of 


58    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

this  disintegrating  process,  and  there  is  no 
limit  to  which  it  may  not  be  carried  at  the 
pleasure  of  the  operator.  Any  book  in  the 
Bible,  or  out  of  it,  could  be  sliced  and 
splintered  in  the  same  way  and  by  the  same 
method  of  argument.  Let  a  similarly  min- 
ute and  searching  examination  be  instituted  into 
the  contents  of  any  modern  book.  Let  any  one 
page  be  compared  with  any  other,  and  every  word 
and  form  of  expression  and  grammatical  con- 
struction and  rhetorical  figure  in  one  that  does 
not  occur  in  the  other  be  noted  as  difference  of 
diction  and  style.  Let  every  thought  in  one  that 
has  its  counterpart  in  the  other  be  paraded  as 
parallel  sections  evidencing  diversity  of  origin 
and  authorship,  and  every  thought  which  has  not 
its  counterpart  in  the  other  as  establishing  a  di- 
versity in  the  ideas  of  the  authors  of  the  two 
pages  respectively.  Let  every  conclusion  arrived 
at  on  one  page  that  does  not  appear  on  the  other 
argue  different  tendencies  in  the  two  writers,  dif- 
ferent aims  with  which,  and  different  influences 
under  which  they  severally  wrote;  and  nothing 
would  be  easier,  if  this  method  of  proof  be  al- 
lowed, than  to  demonstrate  that  each  successive 
page  came  from  a  different  pen." 

THE   SUPPLEMENT  THEORY 

As  might  have  been  expected,  the  fragment 
theory  was  altogether  too  violent  and  extreme 
for  the  majority  of  the  critics.     There  followed 


Various  Theories  About  the  Pentateuch    59 

a  reaction  toward  a  closer  union  of  the  parts  by 
Bleek,  Tuch,  DeWette,  Knobel  and  others,  who 
advocated  what  has  come  to  be  known  as  the 
Supplement  Theory.  This  theory  returns  to  the 
Elohist  and  Jehovist,  but  instead  of  making  them 
authors  of  independent  documents,  it  supposes 
the  Elohist  wrote  first  the  part  which  forms  the 
ground  work  of  the  entire  Pentateuch.  Later  the 
Jehovist  undertook  to  prepare  an  enlarged  edi- 
tion of  the  older  history,  introducing  sections  of 
his  own,  using  materials  within  reach,  and  ampli- 
fying where  the  need  demanded.  This  theory 
had  its  difficulties.  The  great  proof  of  the  exis- 
tence of  a  distinct  Jehovist  document  was  in  the 
evidence  of  a  different  style  and  thought.  But 
this  made  it  necessary  that  the  Jehovist  should  re- 
tain the  Elohistic  document  without  changing  it, 
else  his  own  peculiarities  would  not  be  limited  to 
his  special  contributions.  But  as  a  matter  of  fact 
Elohist  passages  contain  the  very  phrases  and 
words  which  are  said  to  mark  the  Jehovist  pas- 
sages. Again  supposed  Jehovist  passages  con- 
tained the  characteristics  elsewhere  pronounced 
Elohistic.  This  is  explained  by  saying  the  Je- 
hovist imitated  the  style  of  the  Elohist.  But  how, 
then,  can  one  be  certain  of  what  is  distinctive 
authorship  and  what  is  imitation? 

THE   CRYSTALLISATION    THEORY 

The  attempt  to  overcome   objections    to    the 
theories  already  mentioned  resulted  in  still  an- 


6o   Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

other.  Ewald,  in  1843,  opposed  the  fragment 
theory  and  proposed  an  hypothesis  of  crystal- 
Hzation.  He  increased  the  number  of  writers  who 
supplemented  the  earlier  material  from  one  to 
several.  He  imagined  the  most  ancient  parts  of 
the  Pentateuch  to  consist  of  four  fragments, 
around  which  the  later  additions  grew.  Then 
followed  what  he  calls  the  Book  of  the  Origins, 
after  which  came  the  third,  fourth  and  fifth  pro- 
phetic narrators,  each  adding  his  part,  the  last 
of  whom  reformed  the  whole  into  its  present 
unity.  This  work  included  Joshua.  Last  of  all 
the  Deuteronomist  wrote  the  book  bearing  his 
name. 

THE    MODIFIED   DOCUMENT    THEORY 

Still  a  different  theory  was  proposed  by  Dr. 
Hupfeld  in  1853.  He  sought  to  modify  the  docu- 
ment theory  by  urging  two  points:  First,  that 
the  Jehovist  material  was  a  separate  document; 
and  second,  that  the  Elohist  material  consisted  of 
two  documents.  Long  before,  a  second  Elohist 
had  occasionally  been  suggested,  and  Hupfeld  at- 
tributed to  him  those  troublesome  passages  which 
appeared  to  combine  characteristics  of  both  the 
other  writers.  These  three  separate  documents 
were  put  together  by  a  fourth  writer,  who  as 
redactor  modified,  combined  and  transposed  ma- 
terial at  his  own  pleasure.  Any  queer  phenomena 
were  quietly  ascribed  to  the  redactor,  who  is 
altogether    the    most    convenient    discovery    or 


Various  Theories  About  the  Pentateuch    6i 

invention   yet   proposed   to   solve   critical   prob- 
lems. 

THE  DEVELOPMENT  THEORY 

The  historical  analysis  of  Hupfeld  was  taken 
up  by  Graf  who  combined  with  it  his  own  theory 
of  reconstruction.  He  urged  that  Deuteronomy 
must  be  considered  prior  to  the  ritual  law,  or 
priest  code,  which  was  the  work  of  Ezekiel,  with 
additions  by  Ezra.  Kuenen  at  first  accepted  Hup- 
feld's  analysis,  but  later  adopted  the  develop- 
ment theory  of  Graf.  He  taught  that  the  relig- 
ion of  Israel  was  a  gradual  development  from 
polytheism  into  monotheism,  and  a  later  spiritual 
system.  Another  champion  of  this  theory  is 
Julius  Wellhausen,  who  is  followed  by  many 
modern  critics.  It  will  not  help  the  understand- 
ing of  these  theories  to  repeat  here  the  various 
symbols  by  which  these  supposed  writers  and 
redactors  have  been  designated  by  different 
scholars.  They  would  only  be  confusing  and 
are  therefore  omitted.  Suffice  it  to  say  that  each 
has  a  letter  to  designate  him,  as  J  for  Jehovist, 
etc. 

It  will  be  helpful,  however,  to  specify  the 
three  codes  to  which  the  critics  frequently  refer, 
in  dividing  the  legislation  of  the  Pentateuch. 
First  is  the  Code  of  the  Covenant,  which  is  brief, 
and  is  generally  allowed  to  be  Mosaic,  namely 
Ex.  xx-xxiii.  Second  is  the  Deiiteronomic 
Code,  consisting  of  the  laws  which  are  found  in 


62    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

that  book,  not  allowed  to  Moses,  but  probably  to 
an  age  some  seven  or  eight  centuries  later.  Third, 
the  Levitical  or  Priest  Code,  contained  in  the 
later  chapters  of  Exodus,  all  of  Leviticus  and 
parts  of  Numbers.  This  code  it  is  held  began 
later  than  Moses,  and  was  a  gradual  growth, 
not  attaining  its  present  proportions  until  the  time 
of  Ezra.  Somewhere  within  the  lines  of  the 
various  theories  thus  briefly  described  the  criti- 
cal discussions  concerning  the  Pentateuch  will  be 
found.  Any  one  desiring  to  see  a  concrete  pre- 
sentation of  the  general  ideas  involved  in  these 
theories  should  examine  Prof.  E.  C.  Bissell's  little 
book  entitled  Genesis  Printed  in  Colours.  By 
selecting  a  different  colour  to  represent  each  as- 
sumed document,  gloss  or  redaction,  Dr.  Bissell 
gives  the  analysis  as  adopted  by  Kautzch  and 
Socin.  To  the  average  man  this  "  crazy  quilt " 
of  colours  is  bewildering  to  say  the  least. 

As  the  average  man  pauses  to  consider  that 
this  story  of  the  various  theories  of  the  Pentateuch 
is  an  account  of  the  actual  product  of  the  lead- 
ing critical  scholars  of  their  day,  he  is  astonished 
to  realize  that  it  could  be  possible  for  such  chang- 
ing opinions  to  be  formed  about  the  same  ma- 
terial. He  feels  somewhat  as  Archdeacon  Farrar 
expresses  himself  in  his  Hulsean  Lectures  re- 
garding the  critics :  "  The  schemes  which  have 
been  proposed  by  rival  critics  with  so  much  arro- 
gant confidence  and  mutual  contempt  have  suc- 
ceeded to  each  other  in  such  bewildering  multi- 


Various  Theories  About  the  Pentateuch    6^ 

tudes,  like  waves  rushing  over  waves,  that  we 
know  not  whether  most  to  be  astonished  at  their 
rapidity  or  to  despise  their  evanescence !  "  Dean 
Church,  in  answering  the  question — What  does 
Criticism  say  ? — makes  the  assertion :  "  Here  it 
seems  to  me  that  while  the  questions  have  been 
innumerable,  and  the  answers  also,  the  crop  of 
clear,  certain,  and  convincing  answers  has  been 
a  singularly  small  one.  Nothing  seems  to  me 
more  remarkable  than  the  contrast  in  our  time 
between  the  certainties  of  physical  science,  and 
the  contradictory  and  uncertain  results,  the  bar- 
renness, as  a  whole,  of  Criticism  applied  to  the 
questions  which  most  interest  men.'* 

It  must  be  said  there  is  general  agreement 
among  the  critics  regarding  the  composite  char- 
acter of  most  of  the  Old  Testament  material. 
They  hold  to  four  lines  of  proof  for  their  posi- 
tions, (i)  The  many  unnecessary  repetitions. 
But  this  feature  is  common  to  other  literary  pro- 
ductions of  the  time.  (2)  Frequent  discrepancies 
and  inconsistencies.  Many,  if  not  most  of  these 
alleged  discrepancies,  disappear  before  a  reason- 
able consideration,  as  we  shall  attempt  to  show  in 
specific  cases.  It  is  not  claimed  there  are  no 
discrepancies,  but  that  they  are  relatively  few,  as 
compared  with  the  claims  of  the  critics.  (3) 
Want  of  continuity  and  order  in  the  narra- 
tive. But  we  cannot  determine  now  how  men 
should  have  written  then.  They  may  have  had 
different  ideas  about  literary  methods  from  those 


64   Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

of  the  schools  of  to-day.  The  shifting  conditions 
of  the  journey  justify  the  form  of  more  or  less 
disjointed  sections  in  records  which  may  have 
been  afterwards  put  together.  (4)  Differences 
of  style  and  conception.  It  is  true  especially  in 
Genesis  that  we  find  these  differences.  But  that 
only  suggests  that  Moses  had  various  material 
from  which  to  set  forth  the  history  of  the  time 
previous  to  his  own  life.  There  is  no  such  strik- 
ing variety  of  style  in  the  other  four  books  of 
the  Pentateuch  or  in  Joshua. 

The   earnest    position    of   the    critics    is   that 
we    must    take    all    these    lines    of    evidence 
together,    not     selecting    one    at    a    time     as 
insufficient.      But    when    they    are    all    taken 
together  or  singly,  it  does  not  appear  to  many 
conservative  critics,  nor  to  the  average  man,  that 
the  claim  is  proven  that  ''  these  facts  taken  to- 
gether form  an  irresistible  argument  for  the  be- 
lief that  the  Hexateuch  was  compiled   from  a 
variety  of  sources."     Some  additions  and  inser- 
tions doubtless  occurred.    Genesis  indicates  com- 
posite materials.     But  when  we  study  the  other 
books  of  the  group,  as  we  shall  do  in  succeeding 
chapters,  it  will  appear  that  there  are  reasons  for 
declining  to  grant  to  the  critics  any  such  degree 
of  compilation  as  is  claimed  by  them.     It  is  im- 
portant to  realize  that  if  any  one  of  the  theories 
given  above  be  right,  the  others  must  be  wrong 
in  many  features.     The  author  of  any  one  is  as 
great  a  critic  as  the  rest.     Which  is  to  be  fol- 


Various  Theories  About  the  Pentateuch    65 

lowed?  Their  general  agreement  is  only  justi- 
fied by  a  far  larger  agreement  in  details  than  we 
can  find.  There  must  be  more  light  before  these 
theorists  may  fairly  claim  the  confidence  of  aver- 
age men. 


VII 

WHAT    IS    SCIENTIFIC    SCHOLARSHIP? 

THE  foregoing  considerations  make  this  in- 
quiry pertinent.  The  general  claim  of 
the  critic  is  that  he  is  bringing  for  the 
first  time  a  scientific  study  of  the  Bible.  This  is 
true  of  the  methods,  when  they  have  not  been 
abused.  We  are  also  told  that  nearly  all  the 
world's  greatest  scholars  are  advocates  and  sup- 
porters of  the  Higher  Criticism.  But  what  makes 
a  great  scholar?  Not  inventive  ingenuity  in  the- 
orizing, nor  keen  analytic  power  in  itself.  There 
have  been  times  when  the  world's  greatest 
scholars  have  been  followers  of  a  particular  school 
of  philosophy  which  has  dominated  the  thinking 
world  for  a  generation.  But  the  fact  that  a  very 
few  were  against  it,  or  that  many  were  for  it,  did 
not  save  the  whilom  dominant  philosophy.  It 
lacked  something  essential  to  permanency.  It  is 
not  enough  to  parade  names.  Somehow  the  aver- 
age man  has  felt  that  this  movement  had  much  in 
it  which  would  not  permanently  remain  as  an 
abiding  deposit  of  truth  about  the  Bible.  There 
has  been  a  feeling  that  much  of  the  critical  theory 
was  not  truly  scientific. 

Exact  science  makes  a  twofold  demand.     It 
66 


What  Is  Scientific  Scholarship  ?       67 

demands  that  tradition  shall  give  way  to  any  fact 
which  denies  tradition,  no  matter  what  may  be 
the  preconceived  view.  Every  honest  student  de- 
sires this.  But  science  also  demands  that  no 
mere  theories  shall  be  accepted  so  long  as  they 
lack  actual  demonstration.  If  it  be  a  good  work- 
ing hypothesis,  let  it  be  tested  tentatively,  but 
modestly.  True  science  suffers  in  both  these 
directions.  But  one  reason  men  are  inclined  to 
cling  to  old  views  with  unreasoning  prejudice  is 
the  fact  that  so  many  new  theories  have  been  pro- 
mulgated with  unscientific  haste,  and  soon  aban- 
doned for  others.  A  study  of  the  preceding  chapter 
will  illustrate  this  fact.  The  average  man  can- 
not quite  understand  why  such  great  confidence 
is  justified  regarding  theories  which  are  confes- 
sedly only  theories,  especially  when  so  many  of 
the  critics  deal  with  the  views  of  their  fellows 
with  such  vigorous  condemnation.  One  critic  will 
assign  a  given  passage  to  the  Elohist  while  an- 
other positively  assigns  it  to  the  Jehovist.  Kuenen 
actually  claims  there  have  been  no  less  than 
fifteen  redactors  editing  and  reediting  the  work  1 
Then  comes  Wellhausen  insisting  on  nineteen 
redactors ! 

Yet  we  are  told  these  men  reach  their  con- 
clusions by  scientific  processes!  The  critics 
admit  the  palpable  unity  of  the  Pentateuch  as  we 
now  have  it,  but  explain  it  by  the  statement  that 
some  later  writer  worked  up  the  various  parts 
into  this  unity.    Yet  when  we  ask  as  to  the  time 


68   Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

when  this  was  done,  Stahelin  fixes  it  at  the  time 
of  Saul,  DeWette,  Knobel  and  Bleek  at  the  time 
of  Josiah,  Kuenen  at  the  end  of  the  seventh  cen- 
tury B.  c,  Ewald  before  the  destruction  of  Je- 
rusalem, Hartmann,  Bohlen  and  Wellhausen  after 
the  exile.  And  each  of  these  great  scholars  tells 
us  he  reaches  his  conclusions  by  strictly  scientific 
processes !  In  the  face  of  such  lack  of  harmony, 
which  almost  seems  a  hopeless  disagreement,  the 
average  man  cannot  but  realize  that  too  much  un- 
certainty marks  this  work  of  the  specialists  to 
justify  him  in  following  them  with  confidence 
very  far. 

To  indulge  the  "  critical  imagination  "  is  not 
scientific  scholarship,  and  yet  so  notable  a  critic 
as  Dr.  Cheyne,  of  Oxford,  admits  that  this  is 
done.  In  his  Jewish  Religious  Life  After  the 
Exile  he  says :  "  Let  no  one  indulge  in  a  cheap 
sarcasm  on  imaginative  criticism.  These  intui- 
tions are  not  purely  accidental.  They  spring  from 
sympathy  with  an  author,  and  a  sense  of  what 
he  can  and  what  he  cannot  have  said."  The  dif- 
ficulty just  here,  however,  is  that  when  a  man 
decides,  as  a  result  of  his  critical  imagination 
what  a  man  can  have  said,  or  cannot  have  said 
twenty-six  or  twenty-seven  centuries  ago,  an- 
other man  applies  his  critical  imagination  to  the 
same  material  and  arrives  at  an  opposite  conclu- 
sion. That  is  to  say  they  have  both  been  indulg- 
ing in  some  ingenious  guessing.  If  uncertainties 
arise  about  the  ancient  narratives,  surely  there 


What  Is  Scientific  Scholarship  ?       69 

are  also  grave  uncertainties  marking  the  modern 
conjectures  of  the  critics  regarding  them! 

Prof.  L.  J.  Evans,  the  writer's  honoured 
teacher,  realized  the  danger  at  this  point, 
and  sought  to  guard  against  it  thus :  "  I  do 
not  claim  that  all  movement  has  been  prog- 
ress, or  that  every  find  has  been  a  gain. 
I  am  well  aware  that  in  Bibilcal  science, 
as  in  every  science,  there  are  rash  specula- 
tions, unproved  hypotheses,  wild  and  dangerous 
vagaries.  Some  corners  of  the  field  are  full  of 
will-o-the-wisps,  illusive,  unsubstantial,  unsafe, 
gleaming,  I  fear,  with  a  light  that  is  not  from 
heaven.  I  have  nothing  to  say  in  behalf  of  a  bald, 
agnostic,  materialistic  naturalism,  or  of  an  arbi- 
trary, capricious  rationalism,  which,  with  a  priori 
dogmatism,  denies  the  supernatural,  belittles  or  ex- 
punges sin  and  salvation,  eliminates  out  of  history 
God's  revelation  of  himself,  evaporates  out  of  the 
Bible  its  pneumatic  inspiration,  chops  up  its  con- 
tents into  lifeless  fragments,  and  sweeps  away 
book  after  book  into  the  abyss  of  legend  and 
myth.  But  on  the  other  hand,  there  are  conclu- 
sions in  this  field  which  all  whose  judgment  is 
worth  anything  are  agreed  in  regarding  as  sub- 
stantially established.  We  must  reckon  with 
these  facts.  We  must  assign  them  their  true 
value." 

Would  that  this  reverent  Christian  scholar 
had  been  spared  to  point  the  way  of  light 
more  fully,  bringing  out  worthy  conclusions  of 


yo   Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

critical  study,  and  warning  against  the  destructive 
work  which  he  so  brilliantly  described !  In  the 
spirit  of  Dr.  Evans,  Prof.  King  asserts  that  "  most 
important  of  all,  a  clear  line  must  be  drawn  be- 
tween the  results  of  a  truly  scientific  inductive 
literary  and  historical  inquiry,  and  results  reached 
because  of  an  a  priori  antisupernaturalistic  point 
of  view.  The  latter  cannot  be  called  critical  re- 
sults." No  one  can  question  that  the  inductive 
method  must  win.  The  difficulty  has  been  that 
many  critics,  assuming  to  use  the  inductive 
method,  have  not  held  to  it.  Equally  necessary 
is  it  that  those  who  do  not  follow  the  critics 
should  show  why  they  cannot  do  so,  not  by  whole- 
sale condemnation,  but  setting  forth  their  reasons 
by  this  same  inductive  method,  resting  in  the 
facts  presented  for  their  justification. 

Our  inquiry  may  well  be  applied  to  another 
phase  of  the  problem.  The  Scripture  record 
sometimes  differs  from  other  contemporaneous 
history.  From  a  scientific  point  of  view  which  is 
to  be  trusted?  Some  have  assumed  that  when 
Scripture  does  not  agree  with  other  history, 
Scripture  is  wrong.  But  why?  Perhaps  the 
other  records  are  erroneous.  Note  the  opinion  of 
competent  scholars  upon  this  important  subject. 
Prof.  Francis  Brown  says :  '*  The  one  great  dis- 
tinctive feature  of  the  literary  monuments  of  the 
Hebrews  is  that  they  were  informed  by  a  spirit 
to  which  the  inscriptions  of  Nineveh  and  Babylon 
are  utter  strangers.    There  is  a  truth  of  spiritual 


What  Is  Scientific  Scholarship?        71 

conception,  a  loftiness  of  spiritual  tone,  a  convic- 
tion of  unseen  realities,  a  confident  reliance  upon 
an  invisible  but  all-controlling  power,  a  humble 
worship  in  the  presence  of  the  supreme  majesty, 
a  peace  in  union  and  communion  with  the  one 
and  only  God,  and  the  vigorous  germs  of  an 
ethics  reflecting  his  will,  which  make  an  infinite 
gap  between  the  Hebrew  and  his  brother  Semite 
beyond  the  river,  that  all  likeness  of  literary  form 
does  not  begin  to  span." 

Dr.  Wm.  R.  Harper,  in  speaking  of  the 
Assyrian  and  Babylonian  writings  as  com- 
pared with  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  says: 
"  We  compare  these  various  accounts,  psalms 
and  historical  narratives,  and  find  in  one  a 
something  which  seizes  hold  of  us,  moves  us 
powerfully,  elevates  us,  inspires  us.  We  look  for 
this  same  element  in  the  other,  but  it  is  wholly 
lacking.  Instead,  there  is  a  dulness,  a  flatness, 
an  insipidity,  which  disappoints,  and  at  times  al- 
most disgusts.  Why  this  difference?  There  is 
but  one  possible  answer.  This  writing,  or  series 
of  writings,  is  human,  only  human.  The  other 
is  human,  to  be  sure,  but  also  divine.  The  evi- 
dence is  direct;  it  is  absolutely  conclusive  and 
must  be  convincing." 

In  harmony  with  this  important  testimony  Dr. 
Wm.  Hayes  Ward  says :  "  The  Assyrian  records 
are  not  infallible.  Not  to  speak  of  occasional  in- 
tentional falsehoods,  as  when  one  king  assumes 
a  credit  that  belongs  to  a  predecessor,  or  the 


72    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

misinterpretation  of  facts  to  enhance  his  power, 
such  as  the  description  as  a  victory  of  what  was 
really  a  defeat,  as  shown  by  the  fact  that  the 
boasted  victory  was  not  followed  up;  it  is  true 
that  the  Assyrian  scribes  were  likely  to  fall  into 
easy  grooves  in  their  descriptions.  Thus  when 
a  dozen  kings  of  the  Mediteranean  coast  are  de- 
clared to  have  given  tribute  in  a  certain  year  to  a 
certain  king,  and  ten  years  afterwards  he  makes 
another  raid  in  the  same  direction,  and  receives 
tribute  from  the  very  same  kings,  not  one  of 
whom  has  died,  we  may  be  confident  that  the 
names  are  repeated  from  an  old  list  and  are  no 
longer  authentic.  This  is  the  chief  source  of 
error." 

In  the  light  of  such  competent  testimony 
it  immediately  becomes  evident,  not  only  that  the 
Hebrew  records  are  to  be  counted  more  trust- 
worthy than  other  contemporaneous  records,  but 
also  that  these  records  of  Scripture  have  a  face 
value  which  has  often  been  denied  to  them.  Many 
of  the  critics  ignore  quite  freely  the  prima  facie 
evidence  of  authorship  in  most  of  the  books  which 
distinctly  affirm  much  that  leads  to  a  legitimate 
inference  concerning  the  persons  who  had  much 
to  do  with  their  composition.  But  if  these  state- 
ments be  true  as  to  the  superior  reliability  of  the 
writings,  in  view  of  the  spirit  which  dominates 
them,  then  it  must  be  conceded  to  be  scientific  to 
demand  a  greater  consideration  for  this  evidence 
than  has  been  given  it  from  certain  quarters. 


VIII 

FACTS  FROM    THE   MONUMENTS 


o 


^^  y^^  NE  by  one,"  says  Professor  Sayce  of 
Oxford,  *'  the  narratives  of  the  Old 
Testament,  upon  which  the  over 
subtle  anaylsis  of  modern  Criticism  had  cast  sus- 
picion and  doubt,  are  being  vindicated  by  the 
progress  of  Oriental  research."  For  many  years 
one  of  the  most  confident  assumptions  of  the 
critics  was  that  the  Israelites  and  the  surround- 
ing people  were  ignorant  of  the  art  of  writing 
books  at  the  time  of  the  conquest  of  Canaan  and 
during  the  age  of  the  Judges.  They  supposed 
the  literary  period  of  Israel  to  begin  with  Samuel. 
The  oldest  inscription  yet  discovered  in  the 
Phoenician  alphabet  is  fixed  at  the  time  of  the 
Moabite  king  Mesha,  the  contemporary  of  Ahab. 
The  critics  asked  why  no  older  inscriptions  had 
been  found,  if  the  art  of  writing  had  been  known 
centuries  earlier. 

Within  recent  years  the  archaeologist  has 
given  the  answer.  A  single  blow  of  the 
excavator's  pick  has  shattered  some  former 
ingenious  conclusions  of  the  critics.  In  the  year 
1887-8  a  number  of  cuneiform  tablets  were  taken 
from  the  ruins  of  a  city  of  ancient  Egypt,  the  site 
73 


74   Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

of  which  is  now  known  as  Tel  el  Amarna.  They 
consist  of  letters  and  dispatches  sent  to  the  Egyp- 
tian court  by  the  kings  of  Babylonia,  Assyria  and 
Syria,  and  the  Egyptian  governors  and  vassal 
princes  in  the  subject  province  of  Palestine. 
They  are  not  inscribed  upon  papyrus,  or  written 
in  forms  of  the  Phoenician  alphabet,  but  are  en- 
trusted to  more  enduring  tablets  of  clay,  written 
in  the  script  and  language  of  Babylonia  which 
proves  to  have  been,  at  that  time,  the  common 
language  of  diplomacy,  but  disused  in  Palestine 
at  a  later  day. 

This  most  important  discovery  proves  a  wide- 
spread literary  activity  and  a  considerable  educa- 
tional system  through  all  those  eastern  countries, 
running  back  to  the  time  of  Abraham.  The 
most  interesting  of  the  letters  from  Palestine 
are  from  a  certain  Ebed  Tob,  the  governor  of 
Jerusalem.  He  was  not  governor  by  appointment 
of  the  king  of  Egypt,  but  an  ally  who  paid 
tribute.  He  speaks  of  "  the  city  of  the  mountain 
of  Salem."  The  word  "  Uru  "  signified  city,  so 
that  Urusalem  is  the  city  of  Salem,  identical  with 
Jerusalem.  This  Ebed  Tob  speaks  of  himself  as 
being  "  a  priest  of  the  most  high  God."  We  turn 
to  Genesis  xiv,  and  read  the  account  of  Mel- 
chizedek,  king  of  Salem,  priest  of  the  most  high 
God,  and  identify  this  description  with  that  of 
the  tablets,  which  carry  us  back  centuries  before 
the  time  of  Moses.  Moreover  the  "  written 
bricks  "  confirm  the  account  in  that  same  chapter 


Facts  From  the  Monuments  75 

of  Genesis,  of  the  incursion  of  Chedorlaomer,  a 
Babylonian  prince.  Let  us  not  forget  that  IMoses 
was  "  learned  in  all  the  wisdom  of  the  Egyp- 
tians." 

But  the  most  remarkable  coincidences  in  the 
history  of  these  discoveries  occurred  in  the 
year  1892.  .  Among  the  letters  of  the  Tel  el 
Amama  tablets  are  two  that  were  written  by 
governors  of  the  city  of  Lachish,  one  of  whom 
was  Zimrida.  One  of  the  letters  from  the  king 
of  Jerusalem  conveys  the  information  that  Zim- 
rida was  murdered  at  Lachish  by  the  servants  of 
the  Egyptian  king.  In  1890  Dr.  Flinders  Petrie 
was  excavating  in  Southern  Palestine,  at  a  lofty 
mound  known  as  Tel  el  Hesy.  From  various  in- 
dications he  suspected  that  he  had  identified  this 
very  city  of  Lachish.  In  1892  the  work  was  con- 
tinued by  Mr.  Bliss  of  Beirut.  Not  only  did  he 
fully  identify  the  ancient  Amorite  city,  but  he 
found  tablets  exactly  like  those  of  Tel  el  Amarna, 
and  upon  them  this  very  name  of  Zimrida  occurs 
twice.  Scarcely  have  the  letters  from  upper 
Egypt  been  translated,  when  their  counterparts 
in  Southern  Palestine  come  to  the  light,  and  the 
two  parts  of  a  correspondence  which  took  place 
before  the  Exodus  are  joined  together. 

The  result  of  this  recent  discovery  is  conclu- 
sive evidence  that  the  land  of  Canaan  was  in- 
habited by  people  who  were  by  no  means  the  un- 
lettered tribes  imagined  by  the  critics.  One  of 
their  cities  was  named   Kirjath   Sepher,  which 


76    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

means  "  the  city  of  books,"  and  indicates  libraries 
in  Canaan,  as  there  were  in  Babylonia.  In  the 
song  of  Deborah  and  Barak  we  read — Judges, 
V :  14 — that  "  out  of  Zebulon  came  down  they 
that  handle  the  pen  of  the  ready  writer."  This  is 
clearly  the  Hebrew,  but,  on  the  supposition  that 
there  were  no  ready  writers,  various  interpreta- 
tions were  offered  to  explain  the  expression.  But 
the  original  text  is  now  most  clearly  vindicated. 
Moreover  the  tablets  show  that  Canaan  before  the 
Exodus  was  the  great  highway  between  the 
Mediterranean  Sea  and  the  eastern  centres  of 
commerce.  Canaan  paid  to  Egypt  an  annual  land 
tax  which  was  assessed  according  to  surveys  of 
the  Egyptian  Government.  The  enlightened  and 
warlike  Amorites  and  Hittites  were  there,  and 
many  of  the  cities  mentioned  in  the  Scriptures  are 
also  mentioned  on  the  tablets,  such  as  Salem, 
Joppa,  Gaza,  Kishon,  Ekron  and  others.  Prof. 
Erman  says  :  "  There  was  hardly  anything  which 
the  Egypt  of  the  eighteenth  and  nineteenth  dy- 
nasties had  not  obtained  from  Syria.  The  culture 
of  the  Syrians  must  therefore  have  been  very 
highly  advanced  to  have  obtained  such  a  con- 
quest." 

Moreover  let  it  be  remembered  that  the 
conquest  of  Canaan  by  Israel  was  only  partial 
even  until  the  time  of  David.  We  know  also  how 
Israel  grew  into  intimate  relations  with  the  peo- 
ple of  the  land,  and  whatever  else  they  received 
of  a  hurtful  influence,  we  cannot  doubt  that  they 


Facts  From  the  Monuments  77 

felt  the  touch  of  their  intellectual  development 
and  literary  activity.  Such  was  the  literary  at- 
mosphere that  pervaded  the  age  of  Moses.  It 
was  the  golden  age  of  literature  in  the  history  of 
the  ancient  East.  Thus  what  was  for  many  years 
one  of  the  strongest  assumptions  of  the  critics 
against  the  Mosaic  authorship  is  completely  an- 
nihilated. 

The  monuments  have  corroborated  the  Penta- 
teuch in  other  ways.  We  have  noted  that  some- 
times their  testimony  is  not  trustworthy,  and  if 
it  be  contrary  to  Scripture,  it  cannot  lend  strength 
to  the  study;  but  when  two  accounts  agree,  the 
testimony  of  each  to  the  other  is  most  valuable. 
In  the  Egyptian  records  it  is  significant  to  note 
that  it  is  the  pre-Mosaic,  rather  than  the  post- 
Mosaic  records  which  are  confirmed  and  illus- 
trated. A  few  years  ago  it  was  argued  quite 
confidently  that  the  Egyptology  of  the  Pentateuch 
was  so  full  of  errors  as  to  have  made  it  impos- 
sible for  Moses  to  have  written  it.  Bohlen  es- 
pecially urged  this  view.  We  shall  consider  this 
point  more  particularly  in  discussing  the  book 
of  Exodus ;  but  it  may  be  said  here  that  a  dead 
and  buried  Egypt,  of  which  Herodotus  never 
knew,  has  uncovered  her  sepulchres  and  brought 
new  light  to  our  problem. 

We  have  the  testimony  of  Rawlinson,  in 
his  Historical  Illustrations  of  the  Old  Test- 
ament, that  "  in  the  entire  Mosaic  descrip- 
tion   of   ancient   Egypt   there   is   not   a   single 


78    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

feature  which  is  out  of  harmony  with  what 
we  know  of  the  Egypt  of  this  remote  period 
from  other  sources.  Dr.  Brugsch  Bey,  in  May, 
1890,  wrote  an  article  on  "  Joseph  in  Egypt "  in 
the  Deutsche  Rundschau.  It  was  suggested  by 
the  discovery  in  the  previous  year  of  a  stone  at 
Luxor  by  Wilbour,  which  stone  mentions  the 
seven  years  of  want,  and  the  attempt  of  one  Chit- 
het  to  banish  the  calamity.  Brugsch  testifies  to 
the  historical  correctness  of  the  story  as  given  in 
Genesis,  identifying  many  names  and  places.  He 
says  the  evidence  is  so  conclusive  that  you  could 
believe  the  writer  of  the  story  of  Joseph  "  read  his 
statements  concerning  the  affairs  of  ancient  Egypt 
from  the  very  monuments  themselves."  More- 
over let  it  be  noted  well  that  the  features  of  the 
civilization  pictured  by  the  book  of  Genesis  are 
not  borrowed  from  the  period  of  the  Kings  of 
Israel  or  of  the  Babylonian  exile ;  but  they  belong 
to  the  age  of  the  patriarchs  themselves. 

The  monuments  have  corroborated  the  records 
in  Genesis  in  other  particulars.  An  Akkadian 
record  of  the  flood  has  come  to  light,  which  is 
strikingly  in  accord  with  that  in  Genesis.  It  is 
especially  notable  that  this  account,  like  that  in 
Genesis,  has  a  repetition  of  the  story.  Authori- 
ties agree  that  this  record  originated  about  the 
year  2000  b.  c,  or  five  hundred  years  before 
Moses.  The  Babylonian  record  is  a  simple  con- 
tinuous narrative  which  follows  the  biblical  order. 
The  argument  that  Moses  could  not  have  written 


Facts  From  the  Monuments  79 

Genesis  in  its  present  form  has  pointed  to  the  two- 
fold account  of  the  flood  as  one  of  the  proofs  of 
composite  authorship.  But  since  just  such  a 
double  narrative  existed  five  hundred  years  before 
Moses,  and  since  we  have  seen  how  widespread 
Babylonian  literary  knowledge  was,  it  is  scarcely 
possible  to  satisfy  the  average  man  that  Moses 
might  not  have  used  just  such  a  record  himself. 
One  more  instance  may  be  selected  for  mention. 
It  relates  to  the  discovery  of  Ur  of  The  Chaldees. 
The  Bible  student  had  long  been  told  to  find  Ur 
at  Oorfah,  six  hundred  miles  away,  entirely  be- 
yond the  land  of  Chaldea.  But  the  Bible  still 
taught  that  Ur  was  in  Chaldea.  It  was  over- 
looked because  modern  scholars  forgot  that  the 
Persian  Gulf  has  been  filled  up  by  the  River  Eu- 
phrates through  the  centuries,  and  the  ancient 
city,  which  was  on  its  coast,  is  now  far  inland. 
The  geographers  looked  in  the  wrong  place,  but 
the  discoveries  of  Lenormant  and  Smith  have 
identified  Mugheir  as  the  site  of  the  home  of 
Terah  and  Abraham.  The  assumptions  of  the 
scholars,  based  on  insufficient  conjectures,  were 
wrong.  The  statements  of  Scripture,  based  on 
the  facts,  were  accurate  and  correct.  Thus  do 
the  facts  continually  as  they  come  to  light  con- 
firm the  historicity  and  reliability  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. The  student  of  God's  providence  in  his- 
tory cannot  but  be  impressed  by  the  fact  that  the 
records  of  the  monuments  are  brought  to  light 
just  at  a  time  when  we  are  prepared  by  scientific 


8o  Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

knowledge  to  understand  them.  In  an  earlier  age 
they  would  have  been  wasted.  The  more  light 
they  bring  to  bear  upon  the  Scriptures  the  more 
luminous  do  the  sacred  records  shine. 


IX 

THE   HISTORIC    MOSES 

THE  reader  has  noted  in  previous  chapters 
intimations  that  the  critical  problem  in- 
volves other  than  literary  elements. 
Historical  and  theological  arguments  also  have 
place.  It  is  argued  that  the  legislation  contained 
in  the  Pentateuch  is  too  elaborate  when  we  con- 
sider the  religious  ideas  which  prevailed  in  a 
much  later  time.  It  is  argued  the  legislation  must 
have  been  a  growth,  and  the  same  law  of  develop- 
ment which  marks  all  other  religions  must  have 
obtained  in  the  growth  of  the  Hebrew  people. 
Hence  nothing  more  than  the  beginnings  of  the 
Hebrew  legislation  could  date  back  as  far  as 
Moses.  Indeed  Professor  Briggs,  in  his  Inau- 
gural Address,  declares  "  it  may  be  regarded  as 
the  certain  result  of  the  science  of  the  higher 
criticism  that  ]\Ioses  did  not  write  the  Penta- 
teuch." 

It  is  intended  to  approach  the  subject  in 
a  somewhat  closer  study  by  considering  each 
of  the  six  books  included  in  the  Hexateuch.  But 
before  entering  upon  this  examination,  it  is  im- 
portant to  consider  the  significance  of  the  effort 
to  eliminate  Moses  from  the  Pentateuch.  Not  all 
8i 


82    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

the  critics  deny  an  important  place  to  Moses  in 
connection  with  what  they  severally  consider 
early  material,  but  the  dominant  position  in  the 
critical  school  leaves  very  little  of  the  Moses 
whose  work  has  been  considered  for  centuries  the 
substantial  authorship  of  the  Pentateuch.  There 
may  be  many  who  will  say  it  matters  very  little 
whether  Moses  wrote  that  part  of  the  Bible 
which  is  connected  with  his  name.  But  when  the 
far-reaching  character  of  much  of  the  destructive 
criticism  is  understood,  it  becomes  a  matter  of 
very  earnest  inquiry  as  to  how  far  Moses  can  be 
ignored. 

The  great  significance  to  the  discussion  is  not 
found  in  the  mere  question  as  to  who  may  have 
written  the  records  of  the  legislation  and  estab- 
lishment of  Israel  in  the  Theocracy.  But  it  is 
found  in  the  question  as  to  whether  such  a  theoc- 
racy was  established  by  Moses  in  its  essential 
features  in  that  early  day,  or  was  gradually  de- 
veloped through  centuries.  This  is  the  most  vital 
problem  in  the  discussion  of  the  critical  move- 
ment in  Old  Testament  territory.  We  are  told 
the  writings  of  the  Pentateuch  are  referred  to 
Moses  all  through  the  Bible,  just  as  the  Psalms 
are  referred  to  David.  This  of  course  is  a  familiar 
fact;  but  when  we  are  assured  that  we  have  no 
more  ground  for  identifying  Moses  with  the  Pen- 
tateuch than  we  have  for  identifying  David 
with  the  Psalms,  we  must  beg  leave  to  demur. 

The  substantial  Mosaic  authorship  of  the  Pen- 


The  Historic  Moses  83 

tateuch,  as  involving  the  substantial  founding  of 
the  theocracy  by  Moses,  is  of  far  greater  impor- 
tance than  the  Davidic  authorship  of  the  Psalms, 
or  the  authorship  of  any  other  portion  of  the  Old 
Testament.  The  Pentateuch  presents  a  record 
of  events  involving  the  giving  of  the  laws  and 
institutions  of  Israel  from  the  hand  of  God 
through  Moses.  The  naturalistic  and  rationalis- 
tic theories  of  many  of  the  critics  cut  the  very 
heart  out  of  the  Pentateuch  as  an  inspired  record 
of  the  covenant  relation  established  at  Sinai  by 
the  living  God  with  His  chosen  people.  We  do 
not  urge  that  the  Pentateuch  in  its  present  form 
must  have  come  from  the  hand  of  Moses.  The 
writer  believes  the  material  of  Genesis  is  largely 
a  compilation  which  may  have  been  gathered  to- 
gether by  Moses,  and  that  the  essential  features 
of  the  remaining  four  books  of  the  Pentateuch 
must  be  conceded  to  have  been  Mosaic  rather  than 
post-Mosaic. 

In  the  succeeding  chapters  the  objections 
to  the  Mosaic  authorship  will  be  noted  and 
answered,  but  at  this  time  it  is  desired  to  call 
attention  to  certain  general  facts  which  justify 
the  conviction  that  Moses  will  remain  as  the 
recognized  author  of  the  material  which  consti- 
tutes the  bulk  of  the  Pentateuch.  Could  it  be 
proved  that  Moses  was  not  the  author  of  this 
material,  its  value  would  not  be  lost,  but  it  would 
be  greatly  diminished  in  the  writer's  judgment. 
But  the  progress  of  the  critical  movement  has 


84    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

failed  to  satisfy  the  vast  majority  of  Bible  readers 
that  Moses  was  not  the  historic  figure  he  is  set 
forth  in  the  Bible  to  be.  Whatever  may  be  the 
outcome  of  other  questions  of  authorship,  all  of 
which  are  secondary  to  this,  it  is  confidently  be- 
lieved that  a  return  to  a  larger  recognition  of 
Moses  will  ultimately  mark  the  critical  move- 
ment. 

On  its  face  the  Pentateuch  carries  a  clear  pre- 
sumption in  favour  of  the  Mosaic  authorship. 
There  is  the  direct  testimony  of  the  book  to  this 
effect  in  Ex.  xvii:i4;  and  xxiv:3-7;  Num. 
xxxiii :  1-2 ;  Deut.  xvii :  18-19 ;  mention  of  written 
blessings  and  curses  in  Deut.  xxvii  and  xxx,  and 
Deut.  xxxi :  9-13.  Almost  on  entering  the  wilder- 
ness the  Hebrew  lawgiver  received  a  divine  order 
to  write  in  the  book.  On  reaching  Sinai  he  is  dis- 
covered again  writing  in  the  Book  of  the  Cove- 
nant. As  the  wanderings  in  the  wilderness  neared 
their  termination,  he  is  reported  as  having  pre- 
pared a  written  record  of  the  halting  places  in 
the  march.  And  just  before  he  dies  he  is  once 
more  writing  "  this  book  of  the  law."  Prima 
facie  evidence  could  not  be  more  conclusive  than 
this.  A  remarkable  recognition  of  this  fact  is 
given  by  no  less  a  critic  than  Kuenen,  who  writes : 
"  It  is  not  only  the  superscriptions  that  assign 
the  laws  to  Moses  and  locate  them  in  the  desert, 
but  the  form  of  the  legislation  likewise  accords 
with  this  determination  and  place.  Now  this  may 
te  explained  in  two  ways :  either  the  laws  really 


The  Historic  Moses  85 

come  from  Moses  and  the  desert,  or  they  are 
merely  put  into  his  mouth,  and  the  desert  and  so 
forth  belong  to  their  literary  form  and  present- 
ment." Many  critics  choose  the  latter  alterna- 
tive. But  some  conservative  critics  choose  the 
former,  and  their  reasons  for  so  doing  will  be 
given  in  the  following  chapters.  Moreover  the 
Pentateuch  breathes  that  potent  spirit  of  a  living 
contemporaneous  history  which  points  to  the 
writing  of  the  substance  of  its  material  by  one 
who  was  an  eye-witness  and  participant  at  the 
time. 

The  historic  Moses  is  necessary  to  the  whole 
teaching  of  the  Scripture  concerning  the  historic 
Israel.  According  to  this  teaching  these  people 
suddenly  took  their  place  among  the  settled  na- 
tions and  entered  upon  that  conspicuous  and 
unique  racial  development  which  has  continued 
even  to  this  day.  While  there  were  affinities  in 
some  points  with  contiguous  nations,  their  whole 
system  is  set  forth  as  sharply  separated  by  the 
grandeur  of  its  religious  monotheism,  and  by  its 
complex  social  and  civil  organization,  from  that 
of  all  other  nations.  Their  code  of  laws  was  so 
penetrating  as  to  impress  its  indelible  peculiari- 
ties upon  the  race,  and  to  endow  it  with  a  potency 
and  perpetuity  of  national  life,  in  the  face  of 
terrific  counter  influences,  to  which  history  fur- 
nishes no  parallel.  Such  an  eflfect  demands  a 
cause ;  and  that  cause  is  the  living  system  known 
as  Mosaism.    When  the  critics  tell  us  the  record 


86    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

is  not  true  to  the  facts,  and  that  they  have  dis- 
covered how  impossible  it  was  for  Israel  to  do 
as  the  Pentateuch  records,  then  the  average  man 
demands  conclusive  evidence  to  substantiate  their 
claims.  We  shall  examine  these  claims,  attempt- 
ing to  measure  them  fairly,  and  show  why  they 
fail  to  eliminate  Moses  from  his  long-recognized 
place  as  the  founder  of  the  Hebrew  theocracy. 

Another  general  fact  to  be  mentioned  here  is 
that  the  older  parts  of  the  Old  Testament  witness 
to  the  previous  existence  of  the  Pentateuch  by 
striking  references  to  passages  in  the  same. 
Often  there  are  verbal  coincidences  of  expres- 
sion so  accurate  as  to  indicate  a  written  antece- 
dent rather  than  an  oral  tradition.  A  very  help- 
ful study  of  this  subject  is  found  in  Hengsten- 
berg's  Authenticity  of  the  Pentateuch.  The 
book  of  Joshua  is  so  full  of  these  references  that 
it  was  necessary  to  include  it  with  the  Pentateuch 
in  the  theories  of  later  authorship.  In  the  book 
of  Judges  the  refusal  of  Gideon  to  receive  the 
crown  of  Israel  indicates  a  knowledge  of  the 
Mosaic  law  upon  the  subject.  The  same  evidence 
appears  in  Samuel's  unwillingness  to  choose  a 
king. 

One  main  argument  of  the  critics  against  the 
existence  of  the  laws  in  the  earlier  age  is  the 
fact  that  so  many  violations  of  them  occurred. 
But  Bleek  himself,  in  his  Introduction,  is  candid 
enough  to  admit  that  the  fact  that  the  laws  were 
not  obeyed  is  not  sufficient  proof  that  they  did 


The  Historic  Moses  87 

not  exist.  The  same  record  tells  us  of  the  law 
and  of  its  violation.  In  the  earlier  prophets 
Isaiah,  Micah,  Amos,  Hosea,  there  are  continual 
references  to  the  Pentateuch.  In  fact  the  only 
natural  explanation  of  the  divine  authority  which 
the  nation  conceded  to  the  prophetic  message  is 
the  fact  that  Israel  knew  the  law  upon  which  the 
prophet  stood  as  his  sanction  and  vindication  as 
God's  messenger.  In  the  New  Testament  the 
teachings  of  Christ  and  especially  the  whole  argu- 
ment of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  carry  a  tre- 
mendous assumption  in  favour  of  the  actual  work 
of  the  historic  Moses  as  set  forth  in  the  sacred 
record. 


THE  BOOK  OF  GENESIS 

IT  is  proposed  to  give  a  special  examination 
of  each  of  the  six  books  of  the  Hexateuch 
not  only  to  consider  in  more  detail  the  dis- 
cussion regarding  the  historic  Moses,  but  also  to 
give  the  reader  a  close  view  of  the  features  which 
mark  the  work  of  Bible  Criticism.  It  is  of  vital 
importance  to  remember  that  the  Bible  record  is 
only  concerned  with  the  history  of  man,  his  crea- 
tion and  development,  in  so  far  as  it  is  related 
to  the  story  of  God's  plan  and  work  in  redemp- 
tion. The  admirable  statement  of  the  West- 
minster Confession  is — **  The  light  of  nature  and 
the  works  of  creation  and  providence  are  not 
sufficient  to  give  that  knowledge  of  God  and  of 
His  will  which  is  necessary  unto  salvation."  There- 
fore we  have  the  revelation  of  that  divine  will 
and  the  record  of  God's  dealings  with  men  in 
connection  with  the  bestowment  of  this  saving 
truth.  The  purpose  to  accomplish  this  result  at 
once  explains  the  fact  that  all  matters  external 
are  only  touched  upon  as  they  bear  some  relation 
to  this  history  of  man's  redemption,  and  also  ex- 
plains the  marvellous  "  consent  of  all  the  parts  '* 
from  Genesis  to  Revelation.    This  manifest  pur- 


The  Book  of  Genesis  89 

pose  is  the  key  to  the  unity  and  design  of  the 
Pentateuch,  and  explains  the  character  of  its 
construction.  So  also  is  each  book  explained  in 
its  relation  to  the  whole.  In  the  light  of  this 
purpose  it  is  manifest  that  the  book  of  Genesis 
is  intended  to  reveal  the  unfolding  of  the  divine 
plan  up  to  the  time  of  Moses. 

It  is  altogether  reasonable  to  believe  that 
Moses  used  a  variety  of  material  in  the  composi- 
tion of  the  book  of  Genesis,  material  which  came 
from  various  sources.  But  there  is  such  evident 
coherency  in  the  general  plan  of  the  book  that 
the  average  man  is  constrained  to  believe  this 
plan  determined  its  character  from  the  very  be- 
ginning. The  plan  is  seen  in  the  recurrence  of 
the  formula — "  These  are  the  generations."  Ten 
times  we  have  this  expression,  holding  us  to  a 
special  line  of  descent,  according  to  the  divine 
selection.  A  glance  at  the  following  table  will 
show  the  significance  of  this  plan. 

I:  i-II:  3.  General  account  of  the  creation. 

II:  4-IV:  26.  The  generations  of  the  heavens  and  the 

earth. 
V:  i-VI:  8.  The  generations  of  Adam. 
VI:  9-IX:  29.  The  generations  of  Noah. 
X:  i-XI:  9,  The  generations  of  the  sons  of  Noah. 
XI:  10-26.  The  generations  of  Shem. 
XI:  27-XXV:  II.  The  generations  of  Terah. 
XXV:  12-18.  The  generations  of  Ishmael. 
XXV:  19-XXXV:  29.  The  generations  of  Isaac. 
XXXVI:  i~XXXVII:  i.  The  generations  of  Esau. 
XXXVII:  2-L.  26.  The  generations  of  Jacob. 


90    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

By  a  brief  analysis  of  this  table  we  discover 
some  instructive  facts.  The  initial  chapter  gives 
a  general  account  of  the  creation.  The  second 
chapter  is  generally  declared  by  the  critics  to  be 
a  second  account  of  the  creation,  but,  considered 
in  the  light  of  the  general  plan,  that  is  not  an 
accurate  statement.  Evidently  the  purpose  of 
this  chapter  is  to  show  that  out  of  all  the  creation 
we  have  especially  to  do  with  man.  Therefore 
only  so  much  of  the  general  account  is  repeated 
as  is  involved  in  a  more  detailed  statement  con- 
cerning the  creation  of  man.  There  is  a  marked 
difference  of  style  in  the  two  accounts,  but  the 
record  is  consistent  with  the  plan  to  narrow  down 
the  story  to  man.  So  from  Adam  to  Noah  the 
main  purpose  is  to  show  how  the  institution  of 
salvation  was  made  necessary  by  the  fall  and 
corruption  of  the  race.  In  the  tenth  chapter  the 
writer  pauses  to  incorporate  that  remarkable 
ethnological  register,  which  it  is  reasonable  to 
suppose  was   gathered   from   various   materials. 

When  we  come  to  Terah,  we  note  with  surprise 
the  absence  of  the  name  of  Abraham  in  our  table. 
Had  that  table  been  prepared  long  after  the  time 
of  Moses,  it  is  morally  certain  that  the  name  of 
Abraham  would  have  been  there.  The  laws  of 
literary  criticism  point  to  this  unexpected  feature 
as  the  surer  evidence  of  authenticity.  Note  fur- 
ther how  Ishmael  is  dismissed  with  six  verses, 
because  Isaac  is  in  the  chosen  line  of  descent. 
Then  only  one  chapter  is  given  to  Esau,  while  full 


The  Book  of  Genesis  91 

accounts  are  devoted  to  Jacob  and  his  family  as 
the  seed  of  the  coming  nation.  Thus  the  plan 
draws  the  reader  to  the  time  of  Moses.  Why- 
should  he  not  have  been  one,  and  the  most  im- 
portant one  of  the  writers  of  Genesis  ?  The  fact 
is  clear  that  the  book,  as  we  now  have  it,  was 
written  to  fit  into  the  account  of  the  Exodus,  and 
that  it  looked  forward  from  the  time  that  Canaan 
was  promised  to  Abraham,  past  the  thralldom  of 
Egypt,  to  the  time  when  that  promise  should  be 
fulfilled. 

In  a  former  chapter  we  have  noted  that  the 
Babylonian  account  of  the  flood  is  one  continuous 
narrative,  with  all  its  repetitions,  existing  long 
before  the  time  of  Moses.  We  have  also  quoted 
Dr.  Brugsch  Bey  in  his  testimony  to  the  un- 
broken continuity  of  the  story  of  Joseph.  When 
we  note  these  evidences  of  coherency  and  unity 
in  the  book,  we  are  constrained  to  question  the 
conclusiveness  of  theories  about  a  variety  of  frag- 
mentary materials.  Moreover  the  critics  assume 
a  literary  renaissance  of  the  restoration  period 
during  which  they  think  much  of  this  work  was 
put  into  its  final  form.  Yet  Gesenius  declares 
Ezra,  Nehemiah,  Esther  and  Chronicles  to  be  in- 
ferior literary  work,  as  compared  with  the  Pen- 
tateuch. Moses  was  learned  in  the  wisdom  of  the 
Egyptians. 

In  urging  a  later  date  for  Genesis,  the 
critics  point  to  passages  which  seem  to  pre- 
suppose  the   occupation    of   the    land,    as    Gen, 


92    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

xxxvi :  31.  This  statement  is  said  to  indicate  the 
time  of  the  monarchy.  But  it  is  quite  sufficient 
to  consider  this  an  interpolation  by  a  later  writer, 
who  considered  the  explanation  valuable.  Even 
to  add  to  earlier  tables  and  bring  them  up  to  date 
was  a  natural  thing  for  some  later  historian  to 
do.  Probably  several  such  additions  were  made 
from  time  to  time.  Other  passages  suggesting 
later  comments  are  Gen.  xii :  8,  as  suggesting  a 
Palestinian  standpoint,  xiv :  2,  '*  Bela,  which  is 
Zoar,"  xix :  37,  the  expression  "  unto  this  day." 
All  of  these  are  reasonably  explained  when  con- 
sidered probable  later  annotations.  This  explana- 
tion is  the  more  reasonable  because  these  com- 
ments take  on  the  appearance  of  being  interjec- 
tions, and  do  not  partake  of  the  general  tone  of 
the  narrative  which  breathes  an  atmosphere  of 
the  earlier  age. 

ANTIQUITY  AND  CHRONOLOGY 

We  have  noted  in  a  former  chapter  the  fact 
that  modern  scholarship  has  given  us  some  new 
points  of  view  from  which  to  consider  some  of 
the  statements  in  Genesis  regarding  the  creation, 
both  as  to  the  time  involved  and  the  method  of 
evolution.  A  related  problem  is  that  of  the  an- 
tiquity of  man.  The  chronology  of  Archbishop 
Usher  has  been  recognized  as  uncertain,  previous 
to  the  time  of  Moses,  The  discussion  as  to 
whether  Israel  was  actually  430  years  in  Egypt, 
or  whether  it  was  430  years  from  Abraham  to 


The  Book  of  Genesis  93 

Moses  (Acts  vii :  6,  and  Gal.  in:  17),  leaves  the 
time  to  Abraham  conjectural.  Previous  to  Abra- 
ham the  record  is  uncertain  as  to  chronology. 
Just  whether  the  names  in  Gen.  x,  refer  to  in- 
dividuals or  tribes  is  a  debated  question.  The 
fact  is  now  beyond  dispute  that  man  has  lived 
longer  than  4000  years  b.  c.  How  much  longer 
we  do  not  know,  but  the  simple  fact  justifies  the 
statement  that  we  are  not  to  look  for  accurate 
chronology  in  the  early  chapters  of  Genesis.  The 
evident  purpose  of  the  writer  is  to  deal,  with  a 
few  swift  strokes  of  the  pen,  with  the  early  his- 
tory of  the  race  previous  to  the  time  of  Israel  in 
Egypt,  when  the  special  subject  of  the  chosen 
people  is  reached. 

THE  ELEMENT  OF  ALLEGORY  IN  GENESIS 

The  foregoing  consideration  becomes  the  more 
evident  when  we  note  the  character  of  the  account 
of  the  early  history.  The  word  "  Adam  "  simply 
means  "  man."  Literally  it  signifies  "  earth," 
and  refers  to  the  earthly  man.  Wherever  the 
word  ''  man  "  occurs  in  the  Old  Testament,  it  is 
the  Hebrew  "  adam."  The  study  of  the  early 
record,  especially  in  the  light  of  such  New  Tes- 
tament references  as  those  of  Paul  in  Romans  v, 
and  I  Cor,  xv,  makes  it  clear  that  the  teaching  is 
regarding  the  generic  man,  rather  than  a  particu- 
lar individual.  Of  course  the  generic  man  at  the 
beginning  was  the  Historic  Adam  who  faced  the 
problem  of  moral  discipline,  and  in  whose  life  all 


94    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

the  life  of  the  race  was  involved,  as  he  entered 
into  the  experiences  of  sin.  It  is  at  the  point  of 
the  account  of  man's  sin  that  we  must  note  the 
allegorical  character  of  the  record.  The  key  to 
this  account  is  the  expression  "  the  tree  of  the 
knowledge  of  good  and  evil."  This  is  manifestly 
a  figure.  It  suggests  the  setting  of  the  garden, 
and  other  features  of  the  picture.  But  while  the 
method  of  statement  is  figurative,  the  fact  set 
forth  is  the  mighty  reality  of  the  moral  struggle 
of  the  generic  man,  as  he  faced  the  responsibility, 
as  a  conscious  moral  agent,  of  obeying  or  dis- 
obeying the  law  of  God.  In  his  sin  he  has  made 
necessary  the  help  of  a  Saviour  for  man.  This 
is  the  great  fact  to  be  brought  out  in  the  part 
of  the  record  which  is  to  be  introductory  to  the 
story  of  the  work  of  redemption. 


XI 

THE  BOOK  OF   EXODUS 

IN  the  book  of  Exodus  we  touch  the  life  of 
Moses.    Naturally  we  would  expect  to  find 
in  it  a  certain  infusion  of  that  peculiar  evi- 
dence of  personal  knowledge  which  gives  a  liv- 
ing atmosphere  to  contemporaneous  history.    To 
the  average  man  this  spirit  of  autobiography  ap- 
pears on  every  page.     One  of  the  notable  com- 
mentaries on  this  book  is  that  of  Dr.   Kalish. 
He  viewed  Exodus  as  "  forming  the  centre  of 
the  divine  revelation,"  and  consequently  as  being 
"  the  most  important  volume  which  the  human 
race  possesses."    He  brings  the  intimate  familiar- 
ity of  Jewish  scholarship  to  his  task,  and  declares, 
as  against  opposing  theories,  that  "  we  see  the 
completest  harmony  in  all  parts  of  Exodus;  we 
consider  it  as  a  perfect  whole,  pervaded  through- 
out by  one  spirit  and  the  same  leading  ideas." 
The  book  of  Exodus  reveals  the  purpose  to  show 
how  Israel  multiplied  in  Egypt  until  the  time  of 
Moses,  to  give  an  account  of  the  circumstances 
in  which  the  Israelites  quitted  Egypt,  and  to  de- 
scribe the  giving  of  the  law,  together  with  the 
way  the  people  entered  upon  the  institutional  life 
which    centred    about    the    Tabernacle    service. 
95 


g6    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

There  are  some  gaps  in  point  of  time,  but  the 
plan  naturally  omits  much  not  needing  to  be  re- 
corded. How  important  some  items  recorded 
may  have  been  then  we  are  not  competent  to 
judge  now.  There  are  sections  which  stand  com- 
plete in  themselves,  but  having  the  appearance 
of  separate  entries  into  the  journal,  made  at  dif- 
ferent times.  The  sections  preserve  a  continuous 
harmony  and  are  not  disjointed  in  character. 
The  critics  point  to  this  sectional  character  of 
the  record  as  proof  against  its  unity;  but  had  a 
later  writer  been  putting  fragments  together,  he 
would  naturally  have  omitted  some  of  the  repeti- 
tions and  covered  up  the  sectional  points.  The 
very  character  of  the  work  indicates  its  original 
form. 

Objection  is  made  to  the  Mosaic  authorship  of 
Exodus  because  Moses  is  spoken  of  in  the  third 
person,  and  because  there  are  one  or  two  expres- 
sions complimentary  to  Moses,  which  it  is  as- 
sumed he  would  not  have  written  concerning 
himself.  As  to  the  first  point,  it  is  historic  that 
Zenophon  and  Csesar,  in  writing  histories  of 
which  they  were  the  heroes,  both  spoke  of  them- 
selves in  the  third  person.  But  we  find  this  cus- 
tom common  in  Egypt  in  that  day.  As  to  the 
mention  of  a  praiseful  fact,  as  in  xi :  3,  we  may 
say  the  wonder  is  there  is  not  more  of  it.  The 
reference  is  really  modest,  and  the  book  is  marked 
by  a  spirit  of  humility  and  a  sense  of  unworthi- 
ness  in  Moses.    The  critics  again  claim  a  "  double 


The  Book  of  Exodus  97 

treatment,"  as  it  is  called,  for  Exodus,  as  for  all 
the  other  books  of  the  Hexateuch.  When  one 
faithfully  follows  their  analysis  for  a  time",  he  is 
really  astonished  at  the  points  they  seize  upon  to 
prove  composite  authorship. 

But  a  more  important  fact  is  that  he  dis- 
covers the  critics  disagreeing  among  them- 
selves. A  good  illustration  of  this  disagree- 
ment may  be  mentioned  here.  Professor 
Driver  discusses  the  theories  of  Wellhausen 
and  Dillman  about  a  third  writer  being  the 
probable  author  of  certain  passages  in  Exo- 
dus, and  says :  "  The  point  is  one  on  which  it  is 
not  possible  to  speak  with  confidence."  We  find 
DeWette  and  Staehelin  assigning  the  twentieth 
chapter  to  the  Elohist,  while  Knobel  insists  that 
it  belongs  to  the  Jehovist.  We  read  Staehelin's 
statement — "  Wherever  I  find  mention  of  a  pillar 
of  fire,  or  of  a  cloud,  or  of  an  angel  of  Jehovah, 
or  of  a  coming  down  of  God,  I  feel  tolerably  cer- 
tain that  I  am  reading  the  words  of  the  author 
of  the  second  legislation,"  and  we  begin  to  *'  feel 
tolerably  certain  "  that  some  arbitrary  and  fanci- 
ful guessing  is  going  on  in  Staehelin's  imagina- 
tion in  the  name  of  scientific  scholarship.  These 
little  ear-marks  crop  out  now  and  then,  as  one 
studies  the  critics,  and  they  tend  greatly  to  de- 
stroy the  confidence  of  the  average  man  in  the 
real  value  of  their  conclusions. 

The  unity  of  the  historic  movement  in  the 
record  points  to  one  author  of  its  main  contents. 


98    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

Moreover  certain  facts  strengthen  the  conviction 
that  the  author  was  familiar  with  Egyptian  words 
and  phrases.  Canon  Cook,  in  his  appendix  to 
Exodus  in  the  Speaker  s  Commentary,  shows 
that  from  thirty  to  forty  Egyptian  words  occur 
in  the  first  sixteen  chapters.  The  writer  not  only 
shows  familiarity  with  the  language,  but  also 
with  the  climate,  customs  and  products  of  Egypt, 
such  as  ordinarily  implies  residence  there  for 
some  years.  Of  equal  importance  is  the  fact  that 
the  writer  is  thoroughly  familiar  with  the  phenom- 
ena of  the  Sinaitic  peninsula.  That  part  of  the 
book  which  refers  to  the  sojourn  is  pervaded  by 
a  local  colouring,  an  atmosphere  of  the  desert, 
which  has  always  made  itself  felt  by  every  travel- 
ler who  has  explored  that  region.  This  knowl- 
edge of  Egypt  and  the  peninsula  points  to  Moses, 
as  to  no  one  else,  as  the  writer.  It  is  scarcely 
conceivable  that  some  later  writer  should  reveal 
these  characteristics.  Had  a  later  writer  lived  in 
Egypt,  it  is  too  much  to  ask  of  us  to  imagine  him 
traveUing  the  infested  peninsula  that  he  might 
be  able  to  reflect  its  atmosphere.  There  was  no 
time  between  the  exodus  and  the  reign  of  Solo- 
mon when  an  Israelite  would  have  been  at  all 
likely  to  possess  such  familiarity. 

Another  special  feature  of  the  critical  discus- 
sion of  this  book  is  the  contention  regarding  the 
Tabernacle.  The  extreme  critics  claim  that  this 
section  of  Exodus  is  unhistorical,  that  it  is  the 
result  of  the  effort  of  some  late  compiler  to  exalt 


The  Book  of  Exodus  99 

the  ideas  of  the  people  concerning  the  early  priest- 
hood, and  to  give  a  greater  importance  to  the 
earliest  life  of  Israel.  To  do  this  the  theory  is 
that  the  features  of  the  temple  life  at  Solomon's 
time  were  put  back  into  the  Tabernacle,  so  much 
of  the  setting  being  changed  as  would  be  neces- 
sary to  make  it  appear  natural  in  the  desert. 
Concerning  this  theory  more  will  be  said  when 
we  come  to  discuss  the  books  of  Kings  and 
Chronicles.  It  may  be  said  here  that  this  theory 
adds  to  the  difficulties  far  more  than  it  contrib- 
utes to  clear  them.  Possibly  some  of  the  details 
may  have  been  elaborated  by  a  later  hand,  but 
we  have  no  reasonable  evidence  that  the  substan- 
tial story  of  the  Tabernacle  and  its  service  will 
not  stand  as  historic  from  the  beginning. 


XII 

THE  BOOK  OF  LEVITICUS 

THE  book  of  Leviticus  forms  the  centre 
and  heart  of  the  five  books  of  Moses. 
It  contains  the  greater  part  of  the  Sinai- 
tic  legislation,  from  the  time  of  the  erection  of 
the  Tabernacle,  commonly  termed  the  Levitical 
code.  There  are  critics  who  favour  different  docu- 
ments in  other  parts  of  the  Pentateuch  who 
recognize  the  integrity  of  Leviticus,  and  attribute 
it  mainly  to  one  writer,  the  Elohist.  But  others 
bring  their  dissecting  knife  here  as  elsewhere. 
Only  one  passage  suggests  a  late  date,  namely, 
xviii :  28.  But  the  context  here  shows  a  natural 
anticipation  regarding  Canaan,  and  the  second 
half  might  have  been  added  as  a  comment  by  a 
later  writer.  In  the  midst  of  the  legislation  we 
have  a  historic  section,  comprising  chapters  viii- 
X,  recounting  the  consecration  of  Aaron  and  his 
sons.  Certain  naturalistic  critics  would  repudi- 
ate the  genuineness  of  this  section  because  it 
records  a  miracle.  Others  declare  it  to  have  been 
forged  at  a  later  day  to  support  the  authority  of 
the  priestly  caste.  But  it  is  difficult  to  believe 
that  one  who  inserted  an  interpolation  to  exalt 
the  priesthood  of  a  later  day,  would  have  pic- 
100 


The  Book  of  Leviticus  loi 

tured  the  priests  who  figured  in  the  narrative  as 
receiving  the  punishment  of  death  because  of  their 
sins. 

As  to  the  legislation,  the  critics  generally  main- 
tain that  these  laws  came  into  the  life  and  cus- 
toms of  Israel  through  years  of  development.  It 
is  not  unlikely  that  some  laws  were  added  to  this 
code  in  after  years,  but  when  one  examines  the 
opinions  of  the  critics  about  the  matter,  he  is  not 
convinced.  For  instance,  Dr.  Driver  comments 
thus  on  the  fourth  chapter :  ''  It  is  not  impossible 
that  this  chapter  may  represent  a  more  advanced 
stage  in  the  growth  of  the  sacrificial  system  than 
Ex.  xxix,  or  Lev.  viii-ix;  for  here  the  blood  of 
the  sin  offering  for  the  chief  priest  and  for  the 
people  is  treated  with  special  solemnity,  being 
brought  within  the  veil,  and  sprinkled  on  the 
horns  of  the  incense  altar;  whereas  in  Ex.  xxix, 
and  Lev.  viii-ix,  it  is  treated  precisely  as  pre- 
scribed here  in  the  case  of  the  ordinary  sin  offer- 
ing." Let  the  reader  examine  this  text  given  by 
Dr.  Driver,  and  note  its  character.  Ex.  xxix, 
contains  instructions  for  the  consecration  of 
priests,  and  the  reference  to  sin  offerings  is  of  a 
general  character,  in  connection  with  the  act  of 
sanctifying  the  altar.  Lev.  iv,  is  the  distinctive 
law  of  sin  offerings,  as  applied  to  priests,  to 
rulers,  to  a  common  citizen,  and  to  the  whole 
congregation  respectively.  Lev.  viii-ix  contain 
the  account  of  the  consecration  of  Aaron  and  his 
sons  and  their  first  offerings.     To  the  average 


I02    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

man  there  is  no  word  or  syllable  to  justify  the 
idea  that  chapter  iv  contains  any  later  legislation 
than  chapters  viii-ix. 

Of  course  when  a  book  is  largely  a  collection 
of  laws,  it  is  not  strange  that  the  very  nature  of 
the  collection  should  lead  to  suggestions  of  a 
compilation  through  the  years.  But  there  are 
other  tokens  of  earlier  origin  which  must  be  kept 
in  mind.  Aaron  and  his  sons  move  naturally 
through  the  scenes.  The  only  place  of  worship 
mentioned  is  the  Tabernacle.  The  Israelites  are 
always  described  as  a  congregation  under  the 
authority  of  elders.  Everything  bespeaks  the  life 
of  a  camp,  and  that  camp  in  command  of  Moses. 
The  law  touching  sacrifices  in  chapter  xvii,  which 
was  for  the  camp,  is  altered  in  Deut.  xii,  in  view 
of  the  approaching  permanent  settlement  in 
Canaan.  Moreover  certain  laws  are  given  as  ob- 
taining against  well-known  Egyptian  customs. 
Not  only  so,  but  warnings  are  given  against  the 
sins  of  the  Canaanites.  The  chapter  on  the 
monuments  makes  it  plain  that  Moses  would  be 
familiar  with  the  life  of  Canaan,  as  well  as  Egypt. 
Israel  is  taught  that  because  of  Canaan's  sins  the 
people  are  to  be  exterminated.  An  instance' of 
familiarity  with  Egypt  is  the  reference  to  mar- 
riage with  sisters,  a  custom  which  stands  there 
alone  among  the  prevailing  habits  of  antiquity. 

Another  set  of  laws  points  to  a  pre-Canaanite 
origin,  namely  those  in  chapter  xxv,  which  refer 
to  the  Sabbatical  year  and  the  year  of  jubilee.    It 


The  Book  of  Leviticus  103 

seems  this  law  was  never  observed  until  after  the 
captivity.  We  learn  from  2  Chron.  xxxvi:  21 
that  the  years  of  the  captivity  betokened  the  pur- 
pose of  God  to  honour  the  law  which  Israel  had 
broken.  After  the  captivity  the  law  was  kept, 
as  was  that  touching  idolatry.  But  it  is  perfectly 
evident  that  no  such  law  would  have  been  pro- 
mulgated at  any  time  between  the  settlement  of 
the  land  and  the  captivity.  Everything  in  the 
atmosphere  of  the  life  of  Israel  makes  against 
such  a  possibility.  This  law  is  a  part  of  that 
ideal  state  which  was  so  fully  elaborated  by 
Moses,  but  never  fully  obeyed  by  recreant  Israel. 
No  theory  of  naturalistic  development  can  ac- 
count for  these  ideal  laws  which  were  never  kept. 
The  keeping  of  them  after  the  exile  is  marked  by 
a  knowledge  of  them  as  formerly  existing,  but 
not  kept.  The  previous  existence  of  the  law  is 
necessary  to  an  adequate  explanation  of  the  later 
history  of  its  final  observance.  Just  such  laws 
are  the  authority  for  the  utterances  of  the  proph- 
ets in  condemnation  of  Israel's  failures  and  sins. 
This  fact  concerning  Israel's  violations  of  Jeho- 
vah's laws  is  one  of  the  strongest  evidences  that 
Moses  elaborated  a  system  of  legislation,  such  as 
no  after  period  could  have  produced  amid  the 
laxity  and  license  of  the  times. 

Canon  Rawlinson  points  out  that  in  the 
Book  of  Judges,  "  the  sacred  character  of 
the  Levites,  their  dispersion  among  the  sev- 
eral  tribes,   the    settlement   of   the   high-priest- 


I04    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

hood  in  the  family  of  Aaron,  the  existence 
of  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant,  the  power  of 
inquiring  of  God,  the  binding  character  of  a 
vow,  the  distinguishing  mark  of  circumcision,  the 
distinction  between  clean  and  unclean  meats,  the 
law  of  the  Nazarites,  the  use  of  burnt-offerings 
and  peace  offerings,  the  employment  of  trumpets 
as  a  means  of  setting  up  a  king, — all  this  consti- 
tutes clear  evidence  that  the  Mosaic  ceremonial 
law  was  already  recognized  and  considered  in 
force."  So  in  Samuel  we  find  Eli  the  high-priest, 
of  the  house  of  Aaron,  the  lamp  burns  in  the 
Tabernacle,  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant  is  in  the 
sanctuary,  and  the  various  kinds  of  sacrifices  are 
referred  to.  It  is  a  chain  of  evidence  with  strong 
links. 

The  book  of  Leviticus  is  marked  by  a  prophetic 
character.  Its  elaborate  ritual  is  saturated  with  a 
spiritual  significance.  It  is  a  shadow  whereof  the 
substance  is  Christ  and  His  kingdom.  The 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  presents  this  truth  as  its 
great  theme,  and  teaches  that  Moses  was  the 
chosen  servant  of  God  through  whom  this  system 
was  given  to  Israel.  The  reference  is  as  clear  to 
the  historic  Moses  as  to  the  historic  Abraham  or 
the  historic  Christ.  We  read  in  Hebrews  iii : 
5-6,  (R.  V),  "Moses  indeed  was  faithful  in  all 
his  house  as  a  servant  for  a  testimony  of  those 
things  which  were  afterward  to  be  spoken;  but 
Christ  as  a  son  over  His  house."  The  inspired 
writer  means  to  say  that  Christ  is  the  greater 


The  Book  of  Leviticus  105 

Moses  of  the  New  Testament.  Moses,  with  his 
marvellous  gifts,  was  raised  up,  trained  and 
called  of  God  for  his  specific  life-work.  The  law 
was  given  by  Moses :  grace  and  truth  came  by- 
Jesus  Christ. 

The  tone  of  Israel's  life  history  does  not 
suggest  a  gradual  building  of  laws  which 
came  to  permanent  form  after  most  of  the  na- 
tion's life  was  spent.  Instead  of  this,  the  book 
of  Leviticus  breathes  a  constant  spirit  of  pro- 
phetic anticipation  of  Israel's  future  development 
into  greatness,  according  as  these  laws  of  God 
are  honoured  and  obeyed.  Moses  stands  out  in 
the  record  as  a  man  who  was  not  a  product  of 
naturalistic  growth,  but  an  exceptionally  equipped 
man  through  providential  leadings,  out  of  which 
experience  he  gave  Israel  such  a  beginning  in  its 
institutions  as  would  have  been  impossible  in 
ordinary  conditions.  Under  the  leadership  of 
Joshua  this  high  tone  of  the  establishment  of  the 
people  continued,  but  after  his  death  the  laws 
were  ignored  and  every  man  did  that  which  was 
right  in  his  own  eyes.  The  degeneration  was  not 
strange.  But  the  high  standard  remained,  though 
compromised  and  forgotten.  Moses  was  ever  the 
one  great  figure  in  all  Israel's  career,  and  this 
undisputed  fact  makes  it  necessary  for  the  critics 
to  suggest  that  all  after  writers  must  needs  put 
their  contributions  back  under  the  name  of  Moses 
to  give  them  the  force  of  real  law!  This  must 
mean  that  the  day  will  yet  come  when  this  ac- 


io6    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

knowledged  greatness  of  Moses,  dominating  all 
Israel's  history,  will  be  admitted  as  evidence  of 
his  actual  achievements  as  law-giver  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  nation's  life. 


XIII 

THE  BOOK  OF  NUMBERS 

THE  Special  problems  which  the  critics 
have  suggested  in  the  Book  of  Num- 
bers are  numerous.  Many  attacks  are 
not  so  much  made  against  its  authenticity  as 
against  its  inspiration  and  credibility.  Some  of 
the  critics  always  draw  the  line  at  divine  inter- 
vention. DeWette  says  it  is  quite  unnatural  to 
suppose  that  Moses  would  have  been  willing  to 
spend  forty  years  in  wanderings  when  he  was  so 
near  to  Canaan,  and  he  takes  offence  at  the  state- 
ment that  this  wandering  was  a  punishment  for 
Israel's  disobedience.  There  is  much  of  this  kind 
of  destructive  opinion  among  the  non-evangelical 
critics. 

Brief  mention  will  be  made  of  the  special 
points  in  this  book.  There  is  a  gap  of  thirty- 
seven  years  in  the  record,  in  which  we  have  no 
mention  of  the  doings  of  Israel,  excepting  the 
account  of  the  rebellion  of  Korah  and  his  coadju- 
tors. Some  critics  consider  this  proof  that  Israel 
did  not  remain  forty  years  in  the  wilderness,  while 
others  take  it  as  evident  that  the  record  is  incom- 
plete. But  we  have  noted  in  a  former  chapter  the 
manifest  design  in  the  record  to  note  only  those 
107 


io8    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

events  which  touch  the  development  of  the  plan 
of  redemption.  Hence  the  record  passes  over  in 
silence  the  time  in  which  the  people  who  are  not 
to  enter  Canaan  are  supplanted  by  the  rising 
generation.  They  have  no  more  place  in  the 
record.  Much  criticism  is  also  aroused  by  the 
way  several  events  are  apparently  crowded  into 
the  record  of  the  fortieth  year.  The  difficulty 
arises  out  of  the  assumption  that  each  event  men- 
tioned was  finished  before  the  next  took  place; 
whereas  nothing  prevents  the  idea  that  several  of 
them  proceeded  simultaneously,  in  which  case  the 
difficulty  disappears. 

The  critics  have  made  vigorous  attacks 
upon  the  statistics  in  this  book,  the  number 
of  fighting  men,  the  number  of  the  con- 
gregation and  the  number  of  the  first  born. 
It  should  be  said  that  we  cannot  be  sure  of  the 
Old  Testament  record  in  the  case  of  figures. 
There  are  serious  difficulties  in  the  way  of  ac- 
cepting all  the  statements  of  figures.  One  of  the 
easiest  things  to  confuse  would  be  figures  in 
years  of  copying.  Yet  notwithstanding  this  fact, 
it  is  seldom  necessary  to  question  the  record.  In 
this  particular  case  the  reader  is  referred  to 
Keirs  Commentary  for  a  careful  explanation  and 
a  fair  solution  of  all  the  difficulties  suggested. 
We  are  told  the  account  of  the  setting  apart  of 
the  tribe  of  Levi  betrays  the  marks  of  fiction. 
But  the  undeniable  fact  remains  that  the  six 
cities  of  refuge,  mentioned  in  chapter  xxxv,  were 


The  Book  of  Numbers  109 

actually  occupied  by  the  Levites  from  the  begin- 
ning. It  is  further  claimed  that  the  statement  in 
iv :  2-3,  referring  to  the  proper  age  of  Levites 
for  duty,  contradicts  that  in  viii :  24.  But  a  mo- 
ment's examination  shows  that  the  first  refers  to 
carrying  the  Tabernacle,  and  the  second  to  per- 
forming sacred  functions  in  the  Tabernacle.  The 
heavier  task  required  an  age  of  thirty  years, 
while  the  lighter  duties  only  required  a  certain 
maturity  of  twenty-five  years. 

The  episode  of  Balaam  has  naturally  received 
considerable  attention.  It  is  true  it  has  a  dis- 
tinct character.  It  is  also  true  that  these  three 
chapters  might  be  dropped  out  and  the  record 
would  seem  to  be  complete  just  at  that  point 
without  the  account  of  Balaam.  To  the  critics 
this  is  all-sufficient  ground  for  declaring  it  to  be 
a  later  contribution  from  a  different  source.  But 
if  the  episode  occurred  then  and  there,  the  his- 
tory is  not  complete  without  it.  Moreover,  while 
the  record  from  chapter  xxi  to  xxv  would  seem 
unbroken,  if  the  intervening  section  were  drop- 
ped, still  we  would  be  at  a  loss  to  understand 
the  references  to  Balaam  in  chapter  xxxi,  un- 
less we  had  this  record.  As  to  how  Moses  may 
have  secured  the  material,  we  find  in  chapter 
xxxi  that  Balaam  was  slain  among  the  Midian- 
ites  and  his  effects  captured.  Therefore  no 
special  revelation  was  necessary  for  Moses  to 
come  into  possession  of  the  facts.  Very  naturally 
the  style  and  literary  finish  would  be  different 


no   Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

when  the  writer  turned  from  the  journalistic  an- 
nals to  such  a  theme,  which  must  have  thrilled 
his  soul  with  the  vision  of  the  guidance  of  Israel's 
God.  Moreover  the  nations  mentioned  in  Ba- 
laam's prophecy  belong  to  the  Mosaic  period. 
The  Kenites  later  disappear  entirely.  Reference 
to  Agag  was  once  claimed  as  indicating  the  time 
of  Saul,  but  it  is  proved  to  have  been  the  general 
title  of  the  Amalekite  princes  as  Pharaoh  among 
Egyptians  and  Caesar  among  Romans. 

Let  us  now  note  briefly  some  positive  indica- 
tions of  Mosaic  authorship.  The  minute  touches 
here  and  there  point  to  a  writer  who  had  lived 
through  it  all,  as  in  xi :  5.  Some  of  the  passages 
clearly  belong  to  the  Mosaic  age.  Bleek  con- 
cedes chapters  i,  ii,  iii,  iv,  xix,  and  parts  of 
vi,  X,  xxi,  and  xxxiii.  Ewald  agrees  largely 
with  this,  and  adds  parts  of  x  and  xx,  frankly 
admitting  that  "  at  a  later  period  they  could  not 
have  been  attempted."  Concerning  the  camping 
stations  noted  in  xxxiii  there  is  almost  unani- 
mous consent  in  attributing  the  record  to  Moses. 
As  to  the  songs  in  xxi,  Bleek,  in  his  Introduc- 
tion, says :  "  It  is  so  absolutely  against  all  prob- 
ability that  they  should  be  the  production  of  a 
later  age  that  DeWette  has  acknowledged  them 
to  be  of  the  age  of  Moses.  If  we  find  here  songs 
which  do  not  contain  any  reference  at  all  to  the 
circumstances  of  a  later  time,  but  are,  on  the 
contrary,  full  of  features  of  individuality  which 
are  not  otherwise  intelligible,  and  are  without 


The  Book  of  Numbers  1 1 1 

meaning  except  in  reference  to  circumstances  in 
the  time  of  Moses,  it  becomes  highly  probable 
that  they  were  not  only  composed  in  the  Mosaic 
age,  but  that  they  were  then  written  down,  and 
have  come  down  to  us  from  thence." 

We  also  have  in  this  book  the  evidence  of  in- 
timate acquaintance  with  Egypt,  as  in  xiii :  22. 
The  reference  to  the  boundary  of  the  land  sug- 
gests the  time  of  Moses.  The  mention  of  the  Ar- 
non  as  the  boundary  between  Moab  and  the 
Amorites  indicates  a  written  record  while  the 
Israelitish  army  was  still  on  the  south  bank  of 
the  river.  Moreover  the  fact  that  the  boundaries 
mentioned  in  xxxiv  do  not  exactly  correspond 
with  the  land  actually  occupied  clearly  points  to 
this  chapter  as  written  before  the  entrance  into 
Canaan,  for  no  later  writer,  after  Israel  failed  to 
occupy  all  the  land,  would  ascribe  to  them  land 
which  they  did  not  possess. 

It  is  quite  likely  that  this  book,  like  others, 
has  a  number  of  interpolations  by  later  writers. 
It  is  generally  thought  the  Old  Testament  canon 
received  its  permanent  form  during  the  Persian 
period  in  the  years  extending  from  Ezra  to 
Nehemiah.  The  transmission  of  the  Mosaic 
writings  through  a  thousand  3'ears  of  copyists  in 
the  schools  of  the  prophets  and  elsewhere  would 
very  naturally  involve  occasional  marginal  com- 
ments which  would  creep  into  the  body  of  the 
text.  In  chapter  xii :  3  we  have  an  instance  in 
point.     In  XV :  32  the  indication  is  that  the  in- 


112    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

cident  mentioned  was  recorded  after  the  wilder- 
ness journey.  We  read  that  Joshua  added  to  the 
book  of  the  law,  (Josh.  xxiv:26),  and  it  is  a 
reasonable  inference  that  he  recorded  the  account 
of  the  death  of  Moses  at  the  end  of  Deuteronomy 
and  added  some  comments  at  other  points  in  the 
history.  With  all  these  additions  taken  into  ac- 
count in  the  development  of  the  people  and  their 
institutions,  the  indications  mentioned  above  still 
point  to  the  substantial  Mosaic  authorship,  the 
importance  of  which  we  wish  to  emphasize.  It 
seems  more  rational  to  recognize  occasional  later 
touches  as  brief  supplementary  comments,  than 
to  elaborate  an  analysis  of  fragments,  concerning 
the  details  of  which  no  two  experts  agree. 


XIV 

THE  BOOK   OF  DEUTERONOMY 

THE  title  of  this  book  is  likely  to  be  mis- 
leading as  it  is  apt  to  suggest  that  we 
have  here  either  a  second  code  of  laws, 
or  a  recapitulation  of  laws  already  given,  whereas 
it  is  rather  a  summary  of  the  most  salient  fea- 
tures of  Jehovah's  dealings  with  Israel,  and  the 
commandments  whose  observance  was  of  su- 
preme importance  when  the  people  were  settled 
in  the  promised  land.  Many  parts  of  the  law 
already  given  are  not  mentioned,  and  few  new 
laws  are  given.  It  is  the  personal  and  ethical, 
rather  than  the  political  and  official  aspect  of  the 
law  that  is  dwelt  upon.  In  fact,  the  book  con- 
sists of  a  series  of  sermons  having  historical  and 
legislative  features,  but  especially  hortatory,  and 
revealing  the  subjective  spirit  of  the  author. 
This  latter  feature  is  in  contrast  to  the  previous 
books,  in  which  the  objective  element  prevails. 
The  admonitions,  appeals  and  warnings  of  Moses 
are  enforced  by  constant  references  to  the  history 
and  law  which  the  people  already  knew. 

The  living  Moses  moves  through  the  atmos- 
phere of  this  book.    The  attitude  of  the  writer, 
both  retrospective  and  prospective,  is  that  of  one 
113 


114    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

in  the  position  of  Moses  at  the  time  immediately 
before  the  entrance  into  Canaan.  There  is  not  a 
hint  of  Jerusalem,  or  the  temple,  or  the  later 
life  in  the  land.  Such  an  expression  as  "  beyond 
the  Jordan  "  may  have  been  added  later.  The 
principal  foes  are  the  Canaanites  who  disappear 
from  the  record  in  the  time  of  the  Judges.  The 
vivid  reminiscences  of  Egypt  suggest  their  recent 
occurrence.  Such  a  statement  as  that  in  iv :  3-4 
is  only  intelligible  as  spoken  to  those  who  wit- 
nessed the  incident  mentioned.  All  this  points 
to  a  substantial  Mosaic  authorship. 

And  yet  the  radical  critics  tell  us  it  is  quite 
impossible  to  believe  that  Moses  could  have 
written  it.  They  hold  this  view  because  there  is 
such  a  marked  difference  of  style  from  that  which 
marks  the  fragments  which  they  concede  to  be 
Mosaic,  and  because  of  the  same  general  grounds 
on  which  they  stand  against  the  Mosaic  author- 
ship of  most  of  the  Pentateuch.  When  the  aver- 
age man  asks  how  we  are  to  set  aside  the  contin- 
uous claim  in  the  record  that  the  material  is 
Mosaic,  the  answer  given  is  the  most  serious  yet 
made  by  the  critics.  They  must  explain  Moses 
away  somehow,  and  rather  than  abandon  their 
theory,  they  go  to  an  extreme  which  is  aston- 
ishing. They  boldly  tell  us  the  author  of  this 
book  put  the  name  of  Moses  upon  it  in  order  to 
give  it  standing  at  a  later  time.  They  do  not 
like  the  word  forgery,  and  tell  us  we  must  not 
think  of  this  sort  of  transaction  as  forgery,  for 


The  Book  of  Deuteronomy         115 

when  Scripture  writers  did  this,  it  was  not  in- 
tended to  deceive,  but  to  throw  light  upon  the 
historical  situation. 

That  explanation  may  possibly  do  in  some 
instances,  but  in  this  one  it  does  not  satisfy. 
We  ask  for  the  name  of  the  man  who  did 
this  thing,  and  are  informed  that  it  was  prob- 
ably the  prophet  Jeremiah !  How  can  a  man 
be  complacent  in  face  of  such  a  statement  as 
that?  How  were  holy  men  moved  by  the 
Holy  Spirit  to  perpetrate  such  false  assumptions 
upon  the  people?  We  are  told  that  probably 
Jeremiah  and  his  cousin  Hilkiah  connived  in 
giving  this  forth  as  the  law  which  they  found  in 
the  temple  at  the  time  of  Josiah,  having  prepared 
it  for  the  occasion,  and  thus  bringing  it  forward 
just  at  the  appropriate  moment  to  inaugurate  the 
great  revival  in  Josiah's  reign !  We  are  told  this 
must  not  affect  our  appreciation  of  Jeremiah  as  a 
man  of  integrity  and  the  messenger  of  the  God 
of  righteousness  to  Israel !  This  theory  must  be 
carefully  considered. 

The  reasons  given  by  the  critics  are  quite  in- 
sufficient. They  say  if  the  law  had  existed  be- 
fore this  time  it  is  inconceivable  that  it  should 
have  been  lost  as  the  record  teaches.  But  the 
conditions  readily  explain  the  failure,  as  we  have 
noted  heretofore.  The  deplorable  idolatry  that 
prevailed  during  the  reigns  of  Manasseh  and 
Ammon,  extending  through  half  a  century,  is  all- 
sufficient  explanation  of  the  fact  that  the  Pen^ 


Ii6    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

tateuch  was  neglected  and  ignored,  and  by  many 
actually  unknown.  Only  the  few  were  educated. 
The  multitude  were  ignorant.  It  is  urged  fur- 
ther that  the  whole  book  could  not  have  been 
read  through  in  one  day.  But  it  is  assuming  to 
say  it  is  so  reported  to  have  been  read.  More- 
over it  is  asserted  that  it  looks  very  suspicious 
to  have  the  book  found  just  at  the  time  when  it 
was  needed  to  assist  the  plans  of  the  reformers! 
Divine  providence  counts  for  nothing! 

If  Jeremiah  could  declare  from  Moses  what 
was  his  own,  why  could  he  not  declare  from  God 
what  was  simply  his  own  ?  No,  this  is  not  fair  to 
Jeremiah.  The  advocates  of  this  theory  seem 
to  have  forgotten  the  dark  ages  of  Europe,  pre- 
vious to  the  Protestant  Reformation,  when  the 
Bible  was  actually  unknown  to  the  multitudes 
and  known  only  to  the  few,  while  its  teachings 
were  a  dead  letter  and  its  spirit  perverted.  Their 
argument  would  prove  that  no  New  Testament 
existed  until  Luther  found  it  in  a  library  and 
brought  it  forth  to  the  people.  This  fact  of  a 
lost  and  forgotten  Bible  within  recent  centuries 
throws  much  light  on  the  whole  claim  that  be- 
cause Mosaic  laws  were  not  obeyed  therefore  they 
did  not  exist. 

Of  course  it  cannot  be  claimed  that  this  theory 
is  the  result  of  scientific  scholarship.  This  is  a 
theory  made  to  fit  in  with  the  preconceived 
theory,  which  must  include  Deuteronomy  or  fall. 
IwCt  the  reader  turn  to  the  book  of  Deuteronomy 


The  Book  of  Deuteronomy         117 

and  read  it  through.  Then  let  him  turn  to  2 
Kings  xxii  and  2  Chron,  xxxiv.  He  can  judge 
of  their  meaning  and  tone  as  well  as  any  man. 
It  is  a  plain  story  in  itself,  and  its  main  point 
is  that  it  contains  threatenings  of  punishment 
because  "'  their  fathers  had  not  kept  the  word 
of  the  Lord,  to  do  after  all  that  was  written  in 
this  book."  The  fathers  had  had  this  book  in 
their  possession,  for  their  sin  was  that  "  they  had 
not  kept  the  word  of  the  Lord,  to  do  after  all 
that  was  written  in  the  book."  This  was  the 
understanding  of  those  who  announced  its  dis- 
covery, or  they  pretended  it  to  be  so.  But  if  the 
fathers  had  not  seen  it,  they  had  not  sinned  as  is 
represented  here!  Not  only  so,  but  we  note 
again  and  again  how  Moses  is  asserted  to  have 
spoken,  to  have  blessed  the  people,  etc.  Dr. 
Driver  says  concerning  the  song  in  chapter 
xxxii :  "  The  theme  is  developed  with  great  lit- 
erary and  artistic  skill,"  and  yet  the  brilliant 
writer  cannot  prevent  the  confident  critics  from 
discovering  that  the  song  was  written  long  after 
Moses'  time!  The  book  declares  that  it  came 
from  Moses,  but  this  declaration  counts  for 
nothing  in  the  mind  of  the  radical  critic. 

The  extent  of  the  deception  practiced  can  only 
be  realized  by  reading  the  book  through,  keeping 
in  mind  this  theory,  that  it  was  written  some 
nine  hundred  years  after  the  time  of  Moses,  and 
that  the  historical  references  to  incidents  which 
are  represented  as  occurring  are  the  merest  fiq- 


ii8    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

tions  of  possible  traditions!  The  great  point  in 
the  theory  is  that  the  few  men  in  the  scheme 
sought  to  make  the  people  believe  that  Moses 
wrote  the  book  in  order  to  give  them  greater 
authority,  in  their  effort  to  put  down  idolatry 
and  advance  righteousness !  They  even  specified 
the  year,  the  month  and  the  day  on  which  they 
said  Moses  began  to  speak  the  message  recorded ! 
Kuenen  says  of  these  men :  "  They  considered 
themselves  exempt  from  all  responsibility."  But 
it  will  be  a  long  time  before  the  average  man  will 
believe  that  such  a  motive  can  be  back  of  such 
a  production.  Dr.  Alexander  Stewart,  of  Aber- 
deen, says  truly ;  "  The  books  of  Moses  are  so 
high  in  moral  sentiment,  so  pure  in  moral  prin- 
ciple, so  strong  in  defence  of  righteousness,  and 
so  full  of  reverence  for  truth  and  God,  that  it  is 
impossible  morally  to  believe  that  men  so  falsify- 
ing history  for  a  purpose  could  have  composed  at 
the  same  time  such  a  noble  moral  structure  as 
the  Pentateuch."  The  average  man  cannot  be- 
lieve such  a  theory  will  ever  commend  itself,  or 
that  the  facts  will  ever  be  apparent  which  will 
justify  the  acceptance  of  it  by  the  general  public. 


XV 

THE  BOOK  OF  JOSHUA 

THE  Jews  were  accustomed  to  separate  the 
book  of  Joshua  from  the  Pentateuch. 
The  five  books  of  Moses  composed 
what  they  called  the  Law.  Joshua  was  grouped 
with  Judges,  Samuel  and  the  Kings,  composing 
the  books  known  as  the  "  Former  prophets." 
Evidently  this  division  had  its  primary  explana- 
tion in  the  fact  that  Moses  was  identified  in  the 
Jewish  mind  with  the  Pentateuch.  Doubtless  the 
close  connection  of  Joshua  with  the  preceding 
record  was  always  recognized,  but  more  con- 
spicuous than  this  connection  was  the  fact  that 
the  age  of  Moses  stands  out  as  peculiarly  the 
age  of  the  authoritative  establishment  of  the  peo- 
ple under  divine  institutions  received  at  the  hand 
of  the  great  lawgiver. 

From  another  point  of  view  the  book  of 
Joshua  may  properly  be  grouped  with  the 
Pentateuchal  rather  than  the  succeeding  rec- 
ords. As  a  portion  of  the  history,  it  fills 
out  the  account  of  the  settlement  of  the  promised 
land.  When  thus  added,  the  group  of  six  books 
is  called  the  Hexateuch.  The  book  abounds  in 
references  to  the  law  of  Moses,  and  to  the  in- 
119 


120    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

structions  which  he  gave  to  Joshua  as  his  divinely 
appointed  successor  in  the  work  of  completing 
the  conquest  and  settlement  of  the  land,  and  es- 
tablishing the  people  in  the  law  and  worship  of 
God.  Therefore  if  the  composite  authorship  of 
the  Pentateuch  is  maintained,  much  of  it  claimed 
to  be  later  than  Joshua's  time,  the  book  bearing 
his  name  must  also  come  into  this  category. 

The  arguments  here  are  like  unto  those  already 
mentioned  in  former  chapters.  For  instance  it  is 
urged  that  the  book  of  Jasher  was  not  written 
earlier  than  the  time  of  David,  and  hence  the 
mention  of  this  book  in  Joshua  is  proof  that 
Joshua  was  not  written  until  David's  time.  But 
there  is  reason  to  believe  the  book  of  Jasher  was 
a  collection  of  national  ballads  which  received 
additions  from  time  to  time,  as  events  occurred 
which  occasioned  their  writing.  In  Joshua  x:  13 
the  Syriac  version  calls  it  the  Book  of  Canticles, 
and  understands  it  to  be  a  book  of  songs  com- 
memorative of  the  brave  deeds  of  Israelitish 
heroes.  Jasher  means  "  upright,"  and  the  name 
would  be  equivalent  to  the  ''  Hero  Book  "  of  the 
nation.  Reasonable  explanations  are  likewise 
given  for  the  various  traces  of  a  later  date  pre- 
sented by  the  critics.  An  occasional  instance  may 
best  be  explained  as  an  interpolation  or  an  in- 
accuracy in  transmission. 

Far  more  serious  is  the  charge  of  the 
critics  that  the  Deuteronomist  embodied  the 
references    to   his    own    work   in    the   book   of 


The  Book  of  Joshua  lai 

Joshua  in  order  to  facilitate  the  reception 
of  his  pretended  laws  of  Moses.  Ewald  and 
Knobel  attribute  the  work  to  the  Deuteronomist, 
taking  for  granted,  in  their  characteristic  as- 
surance, everything  necessary  to  their  theory. 
Yet  when  it  comes  to  details,  Knobel  pronounces 
Ewald's  system  "  so  complicated  and  obscure  a 
fabric,"  so  devoid  of  all  tenable  hypothesis  that 
it  fails  to  convince.  Of  course  Knobel  expects 
his  views  to  convince,  but  they  fail  with  the 
average  man,  just  as  Ewald's  fail  with  him. 
Again  the  motive  in  the  authorship  repels  us. 
There  are  marks  of  human  imperfection  in  the 
Scriptures,  but  the  average  believer  is  not  ready 
to  accept  a  theory  which  involves  a  cunning  spirit 
of  deception  which  deliberately  purposes  to  mis- 
lead, especially  when  the  very  end  of  the  book  is 
to  secure  truth  and  righteousness. 

There  are  indications  of  earlier  authorship. 
We  have  already  noted  that  chapter  xxiv :  26  re- 
ports Joshua  as  recording  in  the  book  of  the 
Law.  This  points  to  the  fact  that  he  left  written 
material.  There  is  no  alkision  whatever  to  later 
conditions  in  Israel.  The  statement  in  ix :  27 
shows  that  the  place  had  not  yet  been  chosen  for 
the  permanent  altar  of  the  Lord.  The  reference 
to  the  Canaanites  in  Gezer,  in  xvi :  10  indicates 
a  time  before  Othniel  was  judge.  Along  with 
such  indications  there  are  occasional  touches  to 
refute  the  theory  that  the  same  writer  gave  us 
the  Pentateuch  and  Joshua.     For    instance,    a 


122    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

shorter,  more  archaic  form  for  Jericho  is  used 
throughout  the  Pentateuch,  while  the  fuller  form 
is  used  in  Joshua. 

It  must  be  remembered  that  Joshua  stood  with 
Moses  on  the  high  level  of  a  noble  beginning  for 
Israel.  During  his  life  the  conditions  were 
marked  by  an  allegiance  to  Jehovah  which  was 
quite  in  keeping  with  what  we  would  expect  from 
the  generation  which  came  out  of  the  discipline 
of  the  desert,  with  a  faith  in  God  strong  and 
earnest.  But  it  was  when  Joshua  died  and  the 
men  of  his  generation  died,  that  the  time  of  de- 
generation set  in.  Dr.  King  suggests  that  prob- 
ably a  simpler  theory  than  those  already  ad- 
vanced by  the  critics  will  be  found  to  satisfy  the 
facts,  and  will  be  necessary  before  there  will 
be  general  acceptance  of  the  same. 

What  could  be  more  reasonable  than  the  theory 
that  Israel  had  a  start  which  was  not  a  fragmen- 
tary beginning,  out  of  primitive  conditions,  to  be 
slowly  built  up  through  the  ages  ;  but  a  beginning 
marked  by  the  gigantic  contributions  of  the  most 
unique  man  of  the  early  ages,  whose  training 
fitted  him  to  give  them  laws  and  institutions, 
marked  by  comparisons  and  contrasts  with  the 
laws  and  institutions  of  the  surrounding  nations, 
and  having  a  degree  of  completeness  at  the  very 
start  which  the  whole  setting  of  the  history 
makes  reasonable?  The  long  years  of  degenera- 
tion easily  explain  all  the  failures  of  the  people 
to  obey  the  laws,  and  also  make  against  the 


The  Book  of  Joshua  123 

theories  of  very  elaborate  development  of  laws 
and  institutions  by  these  recreant  generations. 

With  the  bulk  of  the  Pentateuch  Mosaic, 
breathing  the  atmosphere  of  the  Mosaic  time, 
the  comments  and  touches  of  a  later  hand  may 
all  have  adequate  explanation,  and  the  future 
books  of  history  and  prophecy  remain  forceful 
in  their  natural  significance  as  finding  meaning 
and  authority  in  view  of  the  long-established, 
though  much  disobeyed,  laws  of  Moses.  Some 
such  theory  is  modestly  set  forth  as  most  likely 
to  be  ultimately  established.  Genesis  may  clearly 
be  recognized  as  a  compilation,  but  the  remain- 
ing four  books  of  the  Pentateuch  should  have  a 
substantial  unity  from  the  beginning.  The  rest 
of  the  Old  Testament  makes  no  such  claim  for 
its  authorship  as  does  the  Pentateuch.  Much  of 
it  comes  from  unknown  writers,  whose  identity 
is  relatively  unimportant;  but  Moses  stands  out 
as  the  dominant  personality  of  Hebrew  history, 
and  will  maintain  his  place. 


XVI 

THE  BOOKS  OF  JUDGES  AND  SAMUEL 

THE  book  of  Judges  is  not  technically  a 
history,  but  a  collection  of  narratives 
relating  certain  important  incidents 
which  occurred  during  that  time  of  imperfect 
organization  extending  from  the  occupation  of 
Canaan  to  the  establishment  of  the  monarchy. 
The  chronology  of  those  early  years  is  uncertain, 
due  not  only  to  the  fact  that  the  time  of  Israel's 
sojourn  in  Egypt  is  a  matter  of  debate,  but  also 
to  the  fact  that  the  figures  in  the  records  seem 
to  have  suffered  in  transmission.  Wherever  we 
j5nd  difficulties  in  Scripture  with  figures,  it  is 
reasonable  to  believe  the  historian  was  accurate, 
but  that  copyists  or  compilers  have  made  the 
mistakes  which  occasion  uncertainty  about  some 
of  the  records.  The  narratives  in  this  book  ap- 
pear to  be  extracts  from  tribal  annals.  They 
are  notable  incidents,  selected  in  accord  with  the 
great  plan  which  dominates  the  whole  record,  to 
illustrate  the  mercy  and  power  of  the  covenant 
God,  to  denounce  idolatry,  and  to  confirm  the 
people  in  their  faith  and  obedience.  The  minute 
details  suggest  early  material  from  which  the 
124 


The  Books  of  Judges  and  Samuel   125 

record  is  compiled,  but  indications  point  to  the 
time  of  Saul  as  the  period  of  its  compilation. 

The  special  fact  to  be  noted  which  bears  upon 
the  critical  problem  is  that  the  records  maintain 
silence  concerning  the  services  of  the  Tabernacle. 
Consequently  it  is  urged  that  no  Tabernacle  serv- 
ice existed,  and  indeed  that  there  was  no  Taber- 
nacle. But  the  analysis  of  the  character  of  the 
book  throws  light  upon  this  silence.  The  nar- 
rative reveals  troublous  times  after  the  death  of 
Joshua  and  through  the  entire  period.  National 
unity  had  never  been  realized,  and  the  few  facts 
recorded  point  to  tribal  isolation  and  even  periods 
of  tribal  antagonism.  After  the  death  of  Phineas 
as  high  priest,  the  central  worship  at  Shiloh  lost 
its  prestige,  and  the  several  tribes  had  their  own 
places  of  worship,  and  at  times  their  own  priests, 
as  in  the  case  of  Micah  recorded  in  chapter  xvii. 
Between  Phineas  and  Eli  the  priesthood  degen- 
erated and  idolatry  supplanted  the  worship  of 
Jehovah.  Yet  we  read  in  chapter  xviii:3i  ''all 
the  time  that  the  house  of  God  was  in  Shiloh," 
and  again  in  chapter  xx :  27  "  the  ark  of  the 
covenant  of  God  was  there  in  those  days."  The 
fact  that  the  ark  was  neglected  is  not  proof  that 
it  did  not  exist.  Moreover  in  chapters  xvii,  xix, 
and  XX  we  find  references  to  the  high  priest  and 
to  the  Levites  as  the  ministers  of  God. 

Reference  is  made  to  this  subject  here,  for 
we  shall  find  occasion  later  to  recall  it  as  in- 
volved in  the  theory  of  a  gradual  development 


126    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

of  the  laws  and  institutions  of  Israel,  to  which 
we  have  already  alluded.  This  theory  involves 
the  entire  literature  of  the  Old  Testament. 
Doubtless  there  was  an  evolution  of  the  national 
life  in  all  of  its  features;  but  it  is  all  consistent 
with  the  fact  that  Israel  was  established  in  the 
theocratic  institutions  by  Moses.  One  of  the 
main  arguments  connected  with  this  general 
theory  is  that  there  developed  a  priestly  caste 
which  did  not  hesitate  to  do  anything  to  secure 
prestige,  and  that  the  priests  changed  the  rec- 
ords, going  back  to  the  beginning  and  putting 
into  the  narrative  these  elaborate  descriptions  of 
ritual  and  ceremonial  to  secure  the  evidence  of 
the  divine  sanction  to  their  claims.  We  have  dis- 
cussed the  principle  involved  in  this  theory,  and 
shall  return  to  it  again.  At  this  point  the  reader 
will  note  how  the  absence  of  mention  of  the  ob- 
servance of  the  worship  of  God  in  the  book  of 
Judges  is  claimed  to  support  this  theory  against 
the  standing  of  the  priesthood.  We  have  pointed 
out  the  line  of  explanation.  We  well  know  that 
high  offices  have  often  been  maintained  though 
their  occupants  were  unworthy. 

The  Books  of  Samuel  are  one  book,  wherein 
we  find  the  organizer  of  national  life  at  work 
in  Israel.  Out  of  the  disordered  conditions  of 
the  times  of  the  Judges  he  brought  an  approach 
to  unity  and  federation  among  the  tribes.  The 
books  of  Judges  and  Samuel  both  abound  in 
evidences  of  a  knowledge  of  the  Pentateuchal  lit- 


The  Books  of  Judges  and  Samuel  127 

erature.  At  times  the  verbal  quotations  show 
the  writer  of  Samuel  to  be  familiar  with  the  nar- 
ratives of  Judges,  as  i  Sam.  xii :  9  and  2  Sam. 
xi:2i.  The  work  of  Eli  evidently  contributed 
much  to  make  the  way  ready  for  Samuel,  and  it 
is  most  significant  that  Eli  was  priest  as  well 
as  judge,  as  was  also  Samuel.  What  could  more 
clearly  point  to  a  prestige  of  the  priesthood  which 
is  not  in  need  of  artificial  explanation? 

The  foundation  of  Samuel's  reforms  was  the 
restoration  of  the  moral  and  religious  life  of  the 
people,  putting  down  idolatry  and  witchcraft.  The 
Philistine  invasion  again  involves  the  Ark  of  the 
Covenant,  and  the  narrative  constantly  breathes 
the  spirit  of  a  recognition  of  God's  laws,  given 
long  before,  but  neglected.  Samuel  established 
schools,  and  the  very  subject  of  study  in  them 
was  the  law  of  Moses,  and  the  history  of  Je- 
hovah's leadings.  Samuel  also  established,  under 
protest,  a  constitutional  monarchy,  whose  law 
for  king  and  people  was  the  law  given  by  Moses 
at  Sinai. 

The  second  book  of  Samuel  touches  the  Hfe 
and  work  of  David,  and  is  to  be  considered  in 
connection  with  the  critical  problem  for  two 
things.  First,  for  its  history  of  the  establish- 
ment of  the  kingdom  by  David.  This  record  is 
essential  to  Holy  Scripture,  and  is  vitally  im- 
portant to  that  conception  of  divine  activity  in 
the  history  of  Israel  which  makes  that  history 
much  more  than  a  natural  growth.    To  the  aver- 


laS    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

age  man  it  bears  the  features  of  historic  accuracy 
and  personal  knowledge.  It  also  begins  a  chro- 
nology which  may  fairly  be  fixed.  This  book  is 
also  important  as  furnishing  the  historic  setting 
to  some  of  the  Psalms.  The  student  will  be  able 
to  understand  some  of  the  psalms  as  he  could  not 
without  this  record.  The  intensity  of  spiritual 
struggle  which  has  so  profoundly  stirred  the  hu- 
man heart  is  the  very  inscription  of  the  biog- 
raphy recorded  here,  and  breathes  the  reality  of 
a  life  that  knows  the  varied  experiences  of  a 
sinful  heart  which  has  found  forgiveness  and 
peace  with  God. 


XVII 

THE  BOOKS  OF  KINGS  AND  CHRONICLES 

THESE  books  are  considered  together  since 
their  relations  are  involved  in  some  of 
the  most  serious  problems  in  our  study. 
They  both  are  in  general  accord  with  the  great 
plan  of  the  Bible,  and  therefore  do  not  give  a  full 
account  of  the  history  reviewed,  but  seek  to  show 
how  the  rise  or  fall,  the  glory  or  decline,  of 
either  or  both  of  the  divided  kingdoms  were  the 
results  of  piety  and  faithfulness,  or  of  idolatry 
and  irreligion.  Hence  much  more  space  is  given 
to  some  kings  and  prophets  than  to  others. 

THE  BOOK  OF  KINGS 

This  is  one  book  in  the  Hebrew.  It  reviews 
the  history  from  the  time  of  Samuel  to  the  dis- 
ruption, and  then  parallels  the  movements  of 
Israel  and  Judah.  The  critics  generally  agree 
in  giving  this  book  first  rank  among  the  his- 
torical materials  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  his- 
torian draws  upon  his  resources  according  to  the 
plan  already  noted,  and  frequently  refers  to 
fuller  details  to  be  found  elsewhere.  He  covers 
a  period  of  about  four  hundred  years,  and  men- 
tions the  Book  of  Solomon,  and  the  Book  of  the 
129 


130    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

Kings  of  Jiidah.  It  would  seem  probable  that 
the  present  form  was  given  to  the  book  about 
the  time  of  the  Captivity,  the  material  being 
drawn  from  contemporaneous  records. 

THE  BOOK  OF   CHRONICLES 

In  Hastings*  new  Dictionary  of  the  Bible  the 
article  on  Chronicles  is  from  the  pen  of  Dr. 
Francis  Brown.  The  general  reader  who  would 
be  interested  in  studying  a  specimen  of  Higher 
Criticism  at  its  best  will  be  rewarded  by  examin- 
ing this  article.  For  acumen  of  scholarship,  for 
painstaking  detail,  for  reverent  spirit,  this  article 
rises  to  the  highest  level  of  Criticism.  The  writer 
cannot  agree  with  all  of  Dr.  Brown's  conclusions, 
but  commends  the  spirit  of  his  work.  This  book 
is  also  one  in  the  original,  and  seems  to  be  of  a 
supplementary  character.  Most  of  the  early 
manuscripts  place  it  near  the  last  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tament collection,  but  it  is  placed  with  Kings 
because  of  its  similarity  in  contents.  Its  author- 
ship was  almost  certainly  after  the  exile.  The 
fact  that  Chronicles  and  Kings  contain  passages 
almost  word  for  word  alike  points  to  the  Book 
of  Kings  as  the  source  of  much  of  its  material, 
or  to  the  same  sources  which  the  author  of  Kings 
used.  It  refers  to  the  Acts  of  Solomon,  the 
Book  of  the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Judah, 
the  Book  of  Shemaiah  the  Prophet  and  Iddo  the 
Seer,  also  the  books  of  the  Kings  of  Israel  and 
Judah.    This  last  is  probably  our  book  of  Kings. 


The  Books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles    131 

Indications  point  to  E::ra  and  Nehemiah  as  com- 
ing from  the  same  atmosphere,  and  possibly 
from  the  same  writer.  After  its  tables  of  gene- 
alogy, this  book  gives  some  attention  to  the 
reigns  of  David  and  Solomon,  and  then  follows 
the  fortunes  of  the  kings  of  Judah. 

The  book  of  Chronicles  presents  serious  dif- 
ficulties to  the  student.  Its  place  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tament Canon  was  tardily  granted.  Where  its 
narrative  conflicts  with  that  in  Samuel  or  Kings, 
it  is  reasonable  to  give  the  earlier  books  the  pref- 
erence, as  having  greater  reliability.  For  in- 
stance we  read  in  2  Chron.  xiii :  3  that  Reho- 
boam's  army,  at  the  succession  of  Abijah,  num- 
bered 400,000  men,  while  that  of  Jereboam  num- 
bered 800,000.  But  in  I  Kings  xii :  21  we  are 
told  the  army  of  Rehoboam  numbered  180,000. 
At  the  battle  of  Waterloo  the  French  army  num- 
bered 72,000  men,  while  the  allied  forces  num- 
bered 91,000.  We  can  only  look  upon  the 
smaller  number  as  nearer  the  fact.  Dr.  Brown 
says :  "  It  would  be  unjust  to  call  the  Chronicler 
a  falsifier.  He  shows  himself,  on  the  contrary,  as 
a  man  of  great  sincerity  and  moral  earnestness. 
.  .  .  His  view  of  the  past  is  that  of  a  son  of  his 
own  age,  in  whom  the  historical  imagination  had 
not  been  largely  developed.  .  .  .  David  and  Solo- 
mon he  idealized,  depicting  the  religion  of  their 
time  according  to  what  seemed  to  him  the  neces- 
sary conditions  of  righteousness."  Dr.  Brown 
adds :  ''  It  follows  that  the  value  of  Chronicles  is 


132    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

not  mainly  that  of  an  accurate  record  of  past 
events.  Nevertheless,  its  value  is  very  great.  It 
is,  however,  the  value  of  a  sermon  more  than  of  a 
history.  .  .  .  The  knowledge  the  author  gives 
us  of  his  own  time,  also  is  historically  impor- 
tant. The  fact  that  he  clothes  old  history  with 
his  own  contemporary  habits  makes  his  own  time 
more  intelligible  to  us." 

ACTUAL   AND   ALLEGED   DISCREPANCIES 

Perhaps  there  is  no  more  appropriate  place 
than  this  to  discuss  discrepancies,  for  the  Book 
of  Chronicles  suggests  more  than  any  other. 
Mention  has  been  made  of  the  difficulties  in- 
volved in  the  large  numbers  given  at  times. 
One  instance  additional  will  suffice.  In  i  Chron. 
v:  21  the  capture  of  the  Hagarites  includes 
*'  100,000  prisoners,  50,000  camels,  250,000  sheep 
and  2,000  asses."  It  seems  impossible  to  avoid 
the  conviction  of  exaggeration  here,  whether  by 
the  original  writer,  or  some  later  copyist  or 
editor.  The  same  person  may  have  enlarged 
some  of  the  figures  in  earlier  records,  as  in  the 
book  of  Numbers,  because  he  thought  it  impor- 
tant to  give  the  impression  which  goes  with  the 
greatness  of  numbers.  These  features  are  there ; 
but  we  realize  that  they  do  not  hinder  the  truth 
which  shines  all  about  them.  Just  how  and  when 
they  originated  we  can  never  know.  It  is  not 
important  that  we  should,  for  they  are  incidental, 


The  Books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles    133 

not  fundamental,  to  the  teaching  of  the  history. 
As  has  been  said,  they  are  but  "  specks  of  sand- 
stone in  the  marble  temple." 

But  more  important  is  the  fact  that  many  al- 
leged discrepancies  do  not  appear  so  evident  upon 
careful  examination.  One  or  two  instances  must 
suffice,  though  there  are  many.  We  are  told  that 
2  Chron.  xiv:3-5  and  xv:i7  contradict  each 
other.  In  the  first  passage  we  read  that  "  Asa 
took  away  the  altars  of  the  strange  gods,  and  the 
high  places  .  .  .  and  took  away  out  of  all  the 
cities  of  Judah  the  high  places  and  the  images." 
In  the  second  passage  we  read  of  a  time  toward 
the  end  of  his  reign  of  forty-one  years,  "  but  the 
high  places  were  not  taken  away  out  of  Israel : 
nevertheless  the  heart  of  Asa  was  perfect  all  his 
days."  The  preceding  verse  informs  us  that  Asa 
removed  his  mother  from  being  queen  "  because 
she  had  made  an  idol  in  a  grove,  and  Asa  cut 
down  her  idol  and  stamped  it,  and  burnt  it  at  the 
brook  Kidron."  This  is  a  clear  side  light  on  the 
two  statements.  Asa  issued  a  proclamation  that 
every  altar  should  be  destroyed  and  actually  exe- 
cuted the  law  in  all  the  cities.  For  a  time  the 
abomination  was  abated.  But  when  his  own 
mother  encouraged  idolatry,  it  is  not  strange  that 
it  should  creep  in  again  during  his  reign,  though 
the  king  himself  proved  faithful.  It  is  not  stated 
that  it  was  allowed  in  the  cities,  whence  Asa  had 
driven  out  the  altars.    Surely  only  common  sense 


134    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

interpretation  is  needed  to  see  that  there  is  no 
contradiction  here! 

Another  charge  is  that  Chronicles  frequently 
contradicts  statements  in  other  books.  One  of 
the  most  famous  alleged  instances  is  that  of  2 
Sam.  xxiv  :  24  and  i  Chron.  xxi :  22-25.  Upon 
reading  the  two  passages  it  is  at  once  apparent 
that  Oman  desired  David,  who  has  offered  to 
buy  the  place  of  the  threshing  floor,  to  accept 
the  oxen  and  wheat  and  wood  for  an  altar  and 
offerings.  But  David  refuses  to  accept  anything 
as  a  gift.  It  does  not  appear  that  Oman  wished 
to  give  the  land,  but  did  offer  the  oxen,  wheat, 
etc.  Now  in  Samuel  it  is  in  connection  with  the 
purchase  of  the  oxen  that  David  paid  fifty 
shekels  of  silver.  But  in  Chronicles  it  is  clearly 
asserted  that  the  price  of  the  place  whereon  the 
threshing  floor  stood  was  six  hundred  shekels 
of  gold.  We  learn  that  Solomon  built  the  temple 
on  this  land,  and  it  must  have  been  much  larger 
than  the  actual  space  used  for  the  threshing  floor. 
And  since  David  insisted  on  paying  the  full  value 
for  everything  purchased,  it  is  certainly  far  more 
reasonable  to  accept  the  exact  statements  given, 
than  to  say  with  the  critics  that  the  writer  of 
Chronicles  thought  the  smaller  sum  unworthy  of 
a  royal  purchaser,  and  therefore  placed  the  larger 
sum  in  his  record  of  his  transaction.  There  is  no 
contradiction  whatever.  Putting  both  accounts 
together,  as  they  may  quite  reasonably  be  placed, 
it  follows  that  David  paid  six  hundred  shekels  in 


The  Books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles    135 

gold  for  the  land,  and  fifty  shekels  in  silver  for 
the  oxen,  wheat,  etc. 

THE  PRIESTS,  THE  TABERNACLE  AND  THE  TEMPLE 

We  come  now  to  one  of  the  most  serious  dis- 
cussions in  all  the  Old  Testament.  We  have  pre- 
ferred to  take  up  the  subject  at  this  point,  for 
the  contention  involves  the  whole  of  the  historic 
material.  DeWette  and  other  critics  have  urged 
that  Chronicles  is  the  book  which  especially  be- 
trays priestly  design  and  ambition.  DeWette 
charges  the  writer  with  unscrupulous  indulgences 
of  strong  Levitical  prejudices,  writing  up  every- 
thing belonging  to  Judah  looking  in  the  ecclesias- 
tical direction.  But  certain  facts  make  against 
this  assumption.  What  could  be  more  natural, 
with  the  rebuilding  of  the  Temple,  than  to  exalt 
its  place  and  the  importance  of  its  services  in  the 
minds  of  the  people?  Any  historian,  anxious  to 
teach  the  great  lesson  of  the  suffering  and  dis- 
cipline of  the  Captivity,  must  have  realized  the 
necessity  of  emphasizing  the  supreme  place  of 
the  nation's  religious  life,  the  neglect  of  which 
had  proved  so  disastrous  in  the  past.  This  fact 
alone  justifies  fully  the  dominant  tone  of  the 
book  of  Chronicles.  It  is  the  charter  of  recon- 
struction of  a  shattered  kingdom  on  its  proper 
historical  basis,  as  a  theocracy  in  whose  Hfe  the 
living  God  has  His  throne  in  the  hearts  of  a  peni- 
tent people.  De  Wette  further  charges  the  writer 
as   having   a   weak   leaning   toward   the   super- 


136    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

natural.  But  it  is  a  plain  fact  that  more  of  the 
miraculous  is  recorded  in  Samuel  and  Kings  than 
in  Chronicles. 

But  the  most  searching  of  all  the  revolutionary 
theories  of  the  critics  is  that  which  asserts  that 
there  was  no  Tabernacle  in  the  wilderness,  and 
no  Tabernacle  service  previous  to  the  Temple! 
Wellhausen,  in  The  History  of  Israel,  is  the 
champion  of  this  view.  He  claims  the  whole 
story  was  a  priestly  fiction,  suggested  from  the 
Temple  of  Solomon,  the  ideas  of  that  Temple 
being  thrown  back  upon  the  preceding  ages  in 
order  to  give  force  to  the  doctrine  of  the  unity 
of  the  place  of  worship,  and  so  to  give  more 
power  and  influence  to  the  priests  and  to  the  re- 
forming kings  in  their  work.  The  further  reason 
given  for  this  theory  is  that  the  early  ideas  of 
religion  were  very  low  and  primitive  in  Israel, 
as  everywhere.  Hence  the  Tabernacle  and  its 
worship  were  too  much  in  advance  of  the  people 
to  have  existed  in  the  time  of  Moses,  and  could 
not  have  been  developed  in  that  age.  But  the 
priests  in  the  Temple  felt  the  necessity  of  some- 
thing as  a  prior  existence  and  set  their  imagina- 
tions to  work  to  fill  up  the  gap,  with  the  result 
which  we  see ! 

Let  him  believe  it  who  can!  The  writer 
cannot!  Geike,  in  Hours  With  the  Bible, 
points  out  that  "  sacred  arks  had  been  seen  in 
every  temple  in  Egypt,  as  the  shrines  of  the  idols, 
or  of  some  object  equally  sacred  and  idolatrous." 


The  Books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles    137 

Jehovah  proposed  to  have  just  such  a  familiar 
shrine  for  His  dwelling  place  with  His  people, 
lifted  above  the  idolatrous  plane  of  the  surround- 
ing nations.  Stanley  in  his  History  of  the  Jew- 
ish Church  shows  that  the  material  used  points 
to  Egypt,  to  the  wilderness  and  to  the  region 
of  the  Red  Sea,  and  emphasizes  the  fact  that  the 
names  of  the  architects  of  the  Temple  are  lost, 
but  the  names  of  the  builders  of  the  Tabernacle 
are  recorded.  To  say  the  whole  story  of  Moses 
in  all  his  doings  as  builder  of  the  Tabernacle  is 
one  long  fabrication,  and  that  all  the  references 
in  the  Scriptures  between  the  time  of  Moses  and 
that  of  Solomon  were  shrewd  interpolations,  is 
the  most  stupendous  proposition  of  all  which  the 
critics  venture  to  make.  It  works  havoc  with 
the  record,  and  were  it  not  that  so  many  critics 
seriously  accept  the  view,  we  would  not  deem  it 
needful  to  dwell  upon  it.  This  theory  tends  to 
shake  the  confidence  of  the  average  man  in  the 
whole  critical  teaching  more  than  any  other  phase 
of  the  movement. 

Some  brief  considerations  must  suffice.  The 
Scriptures  which  follow  the  account  in  Exodus — 
law,  history,  prophecy,  psalms — teem  with  al- 
lusions to  the  Tabernacle,  naturally  woven  into 
the  narrative.  To  object  to  it  because  it  is  called 
the  "  house  of  God  "  is  to  deny  a  natural  figure 
of  language.  Jacob  applied  the  same  term  to  the 
rugged  rocks  of  Bethel.  The  great  argument 
offered  is  that  the  law  insists  upon  one  place  of 


138    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

worship,  but  the  record  shows  many  places  to 
have  been  used.  Hence  there  was  no  one  special 
place  of  worship.  But  the  history  makes  it  plain 
that  the  Tabernacle  rested  at  Gilgal  and  was 
later  established  at  Shiloh,  which  was  the  centre 
of  worship  and  inquiry  of  God.  (Judges  xx:  26- 
2.^  and  xxi.)  Exceptional  worship  by  Joshua  on 
Mt.  Ebal  (x:43),  ^^^d  by  the  two  and  a  half 
tribes  beyond  the  river  (xxii),  is  justified  by  the 
exceptional  conditions  which  are  set  forth  in  the 
record. 

Later  at  Gibeah  David  and  Solomon  came 
because  "  there  was  the  Tabernacle  of  the 
congregation  of  God,  which  Moses  the  servant 
of  the  Lord  had  made  in  the  wilderness."  Then 
in  I  Kings  viii :  4  the  acount  of  the  connections 
between  the  Tabernacle  and  the  Temple  are  told 
in  a  plain,  natural  way.  Much  is  made  by  some 
of  the  apparent  fact  that  the  altars  are  not  made 
of  earth,  as  commanded.  But  it  is  quite  reason- 
able to  think  that  the  frames  of  the  altars  were 
filled  with  earth  always  at  the  place  of  the  camp. 
Again  it  is  urged  that  several  places  in  the  record 
state  that  God  did  not  command  the  offering  of 
sacrifices;  but  it  is  astonishing  to  read  some  of 
these  comments,  when  it  is  perfectly  evident  that 
the  reference  in  such  cases  is  to  spiritual  sincerity 
when  outward  forms  are  used.  The  contrite  heart 
gives  value  to  the  external  form.  Nothing  else 
is  involved  in  these  passages.  There  was  one 
special  place  of  worship,  which  was  the  place 


The  Books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles    139 

of  the  abode  of  the  Tabernacle  through  the 
years.  Various  conditions  and  events  left  the 
continuity  of  worship  broken,  but  the  place  never 
lost  its  unique  significance  until  the  Temple  su- 
perseded it  as  the  abiding  house  of  God. 

Let  the  reader  note  the  statements  in  Joshua 
viii :  31-34,  xiii :  14,  xviii :  i,  and  consider  the 
perfect  naturalness  of  the  record.  Recall  the 
accounts  of  Eli  and  Samuel.  Note  i  Kings  ii :  2- 
3,  and  xi :  34  as  involving  previous  legislation. 
Note  Jereboam's  sin  to  be  in  ignoring  the  Levites 
as  priests,  i  Kings  xii  127-31.  Wellhausen  ad- 
mits the  apparent  early  setting  of  the  story,  but 
says  the  writer  "  tries  hard  to  imitate  the  costume 
of  the  Mosaic  period  and  to  disguise  his  own !  " 
He  adds : — "  The  priestly  code  guards  itself 
against  all  references  to  later  times  and  settled 
life  in  Canaan,  which  both  in  the  Jehovistic  book 
of  the  Covenant  and  in  Deuteronomy  are  the  ex- 
press basis  of  the  legislation.  It  keeps  itself 
carefully  and  strictly  within  the  limits  of  the 
situation  in  the  wilderness,  for  which  in  all  se- 
riousness it  seeks  to  give  the  law ! "  This  is 
really  astonishing! 

The  plain  fact  is  that  all  the  codes  have 
references  to  the  settled  life  of  Canaan,  mak- 
ing provision  therefor.  See  Ex.  xxxiii :  2-3, 
and  xxxiv,  Lev.  xixrQ-io,  xx  122-24  and  xxiii. 
Let  it  be  granted  the  legislation  was  in  advance 
of  the  people.  So  it  is  now  J  The  Dark  Ages  in 
Israel's  history  came  between  the  high  level  of 


140    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

the  time  of  Moses  and  Joshua  and  the  reign  of 
David,  and  then  again  there  was  a  general  de- 
cline of  the  divided  kingdoms  with  occasional 
reformations.  But  the  straightforward  history 
of  the  persisting  recognition  of  God's  authority 
from  the  beginning,  through  all  the  defections  of 
the  people,  points  to  a  historic  basis  which  was 
no  fiction  of  after  centuries,  but  the  abiding  sense 
of  Mosaic  law  and  institution  through  the  years 
of  Israel's  history.  No !  This  astounding  theory 
of  the  critics  will  never  be  accepted  by  the  aver- 
age man,  for  the  facts  are  against  it. 


XVIII 

THE  POETICAL  BOOKS 

THE  poetical  books  of  the  Bible  do  not  de- 
mand special  attention  in  a  discussion 
of  biblical  Criticism,  partly  because 
much  of  the  material  is  anonymous,  and  partly 
because  it  is  not  so  vitally  related  to  the  historic 
structure  of  the  national  life  of  Israel.  From  the 
time  of  Moses  and  Job  to  that  of  the  later  proph- 
ets the  poet  had  more  or  less  place  in  the  literary 
and  religious  culture  of  the  people.  Of  course 
the  critics  have  various  theories  about  all  these 
productions;  but  they  are  of  secondary  impor- 
tance. The  grouping  will  include  the  wisdom 
literature  and  the  songs  and  psalms. 

THE  BOOK  OF  JOB 

The  book  of  Job  is  mainly  poetry,  with  prose 
introduction  and  conclusion.  The  difference  in 
style  and  thought  between  the  prose  and  poetry 
is  quite  marked,  and  hence  the  unity  of  the  book 
has  been  questioned.  Yet  even  Ewald  says : 
"  The  prosaic  words  harmonize  thoroughly  with 
the  old  poem  in  subjective  matter  and  thoughts, 
so  far  as  prose  can  be  like  poetry."  Mr.  Froude 
says :  "  The  book  of  Job  is  now  considered  to  be, 
beyond  all  doubt,  a  genuine  Hebrew  original, 
completed  by  its  writer  almost  in  the  form  in 
141 


142    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

which  it  now  remains  to  us.  The  questions  on 
the  authenticity  of  the  prologue  and  epilogue, 
which  were  once  thought  important,  have  given 
way  before  a  more  sound  conception  of  the 
dramatic  unity  of  the  entire  poem."  It  is  an 
age-long  cry  of  the  human  heart  in  the  effort  to 
comprehend  the  relation  of  God,  righteous  and 
loving,  to  human  suffering. 

THE   BOOK  OF   PSALMS 

The  book  of  Psalms  is  designated  in  the 
Hebrew  a  book  of  praises  and  also  a  book  of 
prayers.  The  two  terms  are  fairly  descriptive  of 
the  general  character  of  the  work,  which  re- 
veals throughout  a  highly  devotional  spirit. 
Lyrical  compositions  from  the  earliest  times 
among  the  Hebrews  had  titles  and  superscrip- 
tions attached,  indicating  the  theme,  or  the  name 
of  the  writer,  or  perhaps  specifying  some  inci- 
dent as  historic  explanation.  There  are  various 
theories  about  the  titles  of  the  Psalms,  the  dis- 
cussion being  concerned  mainly  about  the  time 
of  their  composition.  But  for  the  most  part, 
when  we  go  beyond  the  face  of  the  record,  it  is 
simply  a  matter  of  guess-work.  Ambrose  of 
Milan  wrote :  "  Although  all  divine  Scripture 
breathes  the  grace  of  God,  yet  sweet  beyond  all 
others  is  this  book  of  Psalms.  History  instructs, 
the  Law  teaches,  prophecy  announces,  rebuke 
chastens,  morality  persuades;  but  in  the  book  of 
Psalms  we  have  the  fruit  of  all  these,  and  a 


The  Poetical  Books  143 

kind  of  medicine  for  the  salvation  of  man." 
Calvin  said:  "  I  am  wont  to  style  this  book  an 
anatomy  of  all  parts  of  the  soul,  for  no  one  will 
discover  in  himself  a  single  feeling  whereof  the 
image  is  not  reflected  in  this  mirror."  Concern- 
ing the  twenty-third  psalm,  Mr.  Beecher  said: 
"  It  has  charmed  more  griefs  to  rest  than  all 
the  philosophy  of  the  world." 

THE  SONG  OF  SONGS  WHICH   IS  SOLOMOn's 

This  song  has  been  the  subject  of  much  dis- 
cussion. The  opinions  of  the  critics  vary,  as 
they  always  do  when  variation  is  possible.  Dif- 
ferent periods  have  been  contended  for  as  the 
time  when  this  song  was  written.  Many  have 
also  argued  against  its  right  to  a  place  in  the 
Canon.  The  average  man  is  not  much  con- 
cerned about  the  matter,  for  he  does  not  con- 
sider this  book  as  of  supreme  importance  in  the 
sacred  Canon.  It  has  not  appealed  to  him  with 
any  special  power  or  helpfulness.  It  is  not  pos- 
sible to  come  to  much  certainty  about  the  various 
subjects  discussed,  and  the  book  remains  with 
whatever  it  may  contribute  to  the  students  of  its 
pages.  Some  question  its  helpfulness,  while 
others  deem  it  an  expression  of  spiritual  truth. 

THE  wisdom   literature 

This  includes  Proverbs  and  Ecclesiastes.  The 
utterances  of  the  prophets  partake  largely  of  the 
character  of  the  proverb,  but  stand  in  a  class  by 


144    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

themselves.  The  tone  of  the  book  of  Proverbs  is 
moral  and  intellectual  rather  than  distinctively 
religious.  This  renders  it  none  the  less  spiritual 
in  its  force  because  it  is  full  of  the  realities  of 
life  and  character  in  its  teachings.  Many  writers 
doubtless  contributed  to  the  collection.  One  of 
the  most  striking  features  of  the  book  is  the 
absence  of  that  which  is  distinctively  Jewish. 
Because  of  this  it  becomes  more  readily  a  uni- 
versal teacher.  It  deals  not  with  local  institu- 
tions nor  external  ceremonies,  but  with  the  real 
life  of  the  individual  soul  having  to  do  with 
the  eternal  verities.  The  book  of  Ecclesiastes 
breathes  much  of  the  same  literary  atmosphere  as 
Proverbs.  The  time  of  its  composition  is  un- 
certain. Probably  its  suggestion  of  a  continuous 
homily  on  the  vanity  of  human  interests  explains 
its  recognition  in  a  separate  form. 

THE  BOOK  OF  LAMENTATIONS 

This  book  may  be  mentioned  here.  One  of 
the  interesting  results  of  critical  study  has  been 
the  discovery  of  a  great  lyric  movement  among 
the  conquered  Jews,  both  at  Babylon  and  else- 
where. Many  of  the  Psalms  reflect  the  atmos- 
phere of  captivity,  where  the  great  cry  is  "  If  I 
forget  thee,  O  Jerusalem !  "  The  note  of  grief 
appears  conspicuous  in  the  book  of  Lamenta- 
tions, and  the  captive  heart  breaks  in  sorrow,  or 
revives  in  hope  of  a  better  day  when  God's  de- 
liverance shall  be  revealed. 


XIX 

THE  MAJOR  PROPHETS 

FOR  the  most  part  the  sixteen  books  which 
are  classed  as  the  Major  and  Minor 
Prophets  do  not  demand  special  consid- 
eration in  this  study  of  the  subject.  Most  of 
them  are  accepted  as  reflecting  the  spirit  and 
conditions  of  the  time  at  which  the  prophet  lived 
whose  name  is  connected  with  the  message. 
These  men  are  preeminently  God's  spokesmen, 
and  not  simply,  or  even  fundamentally,  foretel- 
lers of  future  events.  Perhaps  three  of  the  list 
have  engaged  the  critics  in  special  discussion, 
namely  Isaiah,  Jonah  and  Daniel. 

THE   BOOK   OF   ISAIAH 

In  connection  with  the  discussion  of  this  Book 
we  have  a  very  striking  illustration  of  the  dif- 
ference of  view  maintained  by  high  authorities. 
In  the  University  of  Oxford  there  are  two  pro- 
fessors, men  working  side  by  side  in  the  faculty 
of  that  great  institution,  both  experts  in  the  de- 
partment of  Semitic  languages.  One  is  Prof. 
S.  R.  Driver,  Regius  Professor  of  Hebrew,  the 
other  is  Professor  D.  S.  Margoliouth,  Laudian 
145 


146    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

Professor  of  Arabic.  Prof.  Driver's  Introduc- 
tion is  standard  in  the  realm  of  criticism.  In 
that  book  he  favours  the  view  of  a  dual  author- 
ship, not  to  say  plural  authorship  of  the  con- 
tents of  these  sixty-six  chapters.  More  than  a 
century  ago  this  theory  was  put  forth  by  Dr. 
Koppe  and  was  more  or  less  favourably  enter- 
tained, until  Ewald  gave  it  the  distinct  impulse 
which  abides,  though  Ewald  finds  no  less  than 
seven  authors.  Dr.  Driver  accords  with  the  gen- 
eral view  which  has  been  prevalent  that  the  first 
thirty-five  chapters  were  written  by  Isaiah,  but 
is  convinced  that  chapters  xl-lxvi  were  written 
by  a  later  author.  Those  four  chapters  of  his- 
tory, xxxvi-xxxix,  generally  identified  with  the 
first  part,  do  not  seem  to  be  involved  in  the  more 
distinctive  problem  which  deals  with  the  two  sec- 
tions called  more  especially  prophecy. 

The  reader  soon  discovers  certain  marks  of  dif- 
ference between  these  two  parts  of  the  book.  The 
first  part  presents  the  great  enemy  of  Israel  as  be- 
ing Assyria,  and  is  largely  denunciatory,  pictur- 
ing the  Messiah  as  a  mighty  king  and  ruler.  Part 
second  deals  with  Babylon  as  Israel's  enemy,  is 
largely  consolatory,  and  presents  the  Messiah  as 
a  suflfering  victim,  a  meek  and  lowly  redeemer. 
There  are  abundant  indications  that  the  book 
is  a  collection  of  utterances  delivered  from  time 
to  time,  the  chronological  order  in  the  arrange- 
ment appearing  throughout.  Prof.  Driver  holds 
that  a  short  section  of  the  early  part  is  written 


The  Major  Prophets  147 

by  an  exilic  writer;  but  his  main  contention  is 
that  chapters  xl-lxvi,  must  have  been  written  by 
an  exilic  author.  His  reasons  will  be  presented 
in  a  moment. 

It  will  help  us  to  expedite  the  presenta- 
tion, if  we  consider  in  connection  with  Dr. 
Driver's  view,  that  of  Prof.  Margoliouth. 
The  Arabic  professor  does  not  agree  with  the 
Hebrew  professor.  In  his  book  on  Lines  of 
Defense  of  The  Biblical  Revelation,  Prof.  Mar- 
goliouth gives  the  average  man  reason  to  pause 
before  he  accepts  the  views  of  the  critics.  As 
a  preliminary  suggestion  he  calls  attention  to 
the  fact  that  the  twelve  minor  prophets  have 
given  us  about  the  same  amount  of  material  as 
is  given  in  the  Book  of  Isaiah.  None  of  these 
men  rank  with  Isaiah  for  literary  merit,  or 
thrills  as  does  Isaiah;  yet  they  are  all  kept  dis- 
tinct. How  comes  it  then  that  some  brilliant 
genius  of  half  of  Isaiah  is  forgotten  and  un- 
known? This  suggestion  is  of  some  value,  and 
yet  it  must  be  remembered  that  we  have  impor- 
tant books,  like  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  whose 
author  is  unknown. 

Prof.  Driver  holds  that  we  have  three  inde- 
pendent lines  of  argument  to  prove  that  a  later 
author  wrote  the  second  part  of  the  book.  His 
first  argument  is  from  the  internal  evidence, 
which  he  claims  shows  the  book  to  have  been 
written  at  the  time  of  the  Babylonian  captivity. 
The  traditional  view  is  that  Isaiah  was  carried 


148    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

forward  by  the  spirit  of  prophecy  into  a  vision 
of  the  future,  which  is  here  recorded.  But  Dr. 
Driver  urges  that  the  prophet  always  spoke  pri- 
marily to  his  own  time,  and  while  he  sometimes 
looked  into  the  future,  his  main  purpose  was  to 
bring  a  lesson  to  the  people  of  his  own  time  to 
lead  them  to  faithfulness.  He  claims  that  this 
section  does  not  predict  exile,  but  presupposes 
it,  and  mainly  promises  deliverance.  The  appear- 
ance of  the  name  of  Cyrus  is  one  of  the  special 
points  urged  by  this  school  as  very  strongly  pre- 
sumptive against  an  authorship  of  an  earlier  time. 
Moreover  reference  is  to  Jerusalem  as  ruined  and 
deserted. 

To  this  claim  Prof.  Margoliouth  answers 
by  pointing  out  the  fact  that  in  the  third 
chapter  Jerusalem  is  described  as  fallen  and 
Judah  as  destroyed.  If  this  be  prediction  in  the 
third  chapter,  why  not  in  the  later  section?  As 
to  the  mention  of  the  name  of  Cyrus,  he  points 
out  that  the  author  of  the  second  section  makes 
the  particular  claim  that  Jehovah  is  proving  His 
power  by  predicting  the  future,  and  challenging 
other  gods  to  show  like  ability,  as  in  xlv:  11- 19, 
"  Thus  saith  Jehovah,  the  holy  one  of  Israel,  ask 
me  things  to  come,  concerning  my  sons  and  con- 
cerning my  daughters.  ...  I  have  not  spoken 
in  secret,  in  a  dark  place  of  the  earth.  .  .  . 
Let  the  strange  gods  shew  the  things  that  are  to 
come  hereafter,  that  we  may  know  that  they  are 
gods."    Yet  Prof.  Driver  says  this  section  is  not 


The  Major  Prophets  149 

predictive,  while  his  fellow-professor  says  that  is 
its  greatest  claim. 

The  further  fact  is  pointed  out  by  Prof. 
Margoliouth  that  the  writer,  though  he  uses 
the  name  of  Cyrus,  does  not  show  any  fa- 
miliarity with  Persia.  Ezekiel  is  quite  familiar 
with  this  name,  but  it  is  unknown  to  the  second 
Isaiah.  Moreover  the  writer  knows  the  rocks  and 
hills,  the  lakes  and  rivers,  the  trees  and  customs 
of  Palestine,  but  does  not  give  a  hint  of  the  plains 
of  Babylon.  The  Arabic  professor  gives  at 
length  facts  concerning  words  that  appear  in  the 
lirst  Isaiah,  which  are  also  evidently  familiar  to 
the  second  Isaiah,  but  appear  nowhere  else  in  the 
Old  Testament.  It  should  be  noted  in  passing 
that  Dr.  Cheyne,  another  Oxford  professor,  and 
a  radical  critic,  says :  ''  Some  passages  of  second 
Isaiah  are  in  various  degrees,  really  favourable 
to  the  theory  of  a  Palestinian  origin."  The  fact 
is  that  this  evidence  of  Palestinian  atmosphere 
in  the  second  part  of  the  book  has  led  some  later 
critics  to  hold  that  it  was  written  in  Palestine 
after  the  writer  had  returned  from  Babylon ! 

The  second  argument  by  Dr.  Driver  is  based 
on  the  difference  of  style  which  he  claims  exists 
between  the  two  parts  of  the  book.  He  urges 
this  at  some  length,  setting  forth  different  ex- 
pressions, different  imagery,  etc.  But  the  Arabic 
professor  refuses  to  place  the  value  upon  this 
argument  which  the  Hebrew  professor  would 
urge.    He  says  arguments  drawn  from  language 


150    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

and  style  are  too  inconclusive  to  have  scientific 
value.  He  urges  that  the  same  writer,  in  differ- 
ent periods  of  his  life,  may  have  quite  a  differ- 
ent style,  phrases,  methods  of  thought,  etc.  He 
then  proceeds  to  show  what  appear  to  him  indica- 
tions of  identity  of  style  in  the  two  parts  of  the 
book. 

It  may  also  be  mentioned  that  Dr.  Cheyne 
allows  that  the  "  Great  Unknown,"  as  he 
describes  the  second  Isaiah,  often  imitated 
Isaiah's  style  and  knew  his  prophecies  by  heart. 
He  goes  on  to  argue  that  unity  of  style  does  not 
prove  unity  of  authorship.  That  is  to  say,  he 
does  not  urge  his  view  of  plural  Isaiahs  from 
the  difference  of  style,  but  from  the  character  of 
the  contents.  Let  the  reader  go  carefully  over 
these  sixty-six  chapters,  and  he  will  discover  just 
as  great  a  variety  of  style  between  different  parts 
of  both  the  first  and  second  sections  as  appear 
between  the  sections  themselves.  If  the  evidence 
points  to  more  than  one  author,  it  must  be 
granted  that  it  justifies  six  or  seven.  We  cannot 
stop  with  two,  if  we  need  more  than  one  to  ex- 
plain the  record.  We  have  referred  in  a  former 
chapter  to  the  great  differences  in  style  in  the 
writings  of  men  well  known,  as  Gladstone  and 
Lowell. 

Dr.  Driver's  third  argument  is  that  the  theo- 
logical ideas  are  very  different  in  the  two  parts  of 
the  book.  On  this  point  the  Arabic  professor 
does  not  dwell ;  but  he  shows  with  striking  force 


The  Major  Prophets  151 

that  the  idolatrous  practices  rebuked  by  the  sec- 
ond Isaiah  are  pre-exiUc  rites,  not  practiced  dur- 
ing or  after  the  exile!  What  significance  could 
such  rebukes  have  at  a  later  time,  after  the  ob- 
jectionable practices  had  ceased?  As  to  different 
theological  views,  does  not  the  changed  condition 
demand  it?  The  earlier  period  is  marked  by 
warnings  of  punishment  because  of  sin,  when  the 
authority  of  God  as  king  is  insisted  upon,  and  dis- 
obedience to  His  law  threatened  with  dire  penal- 
ties. Yet  in  both  sections  of  the  book,  as  in  all 
the  prophets,  this  warning  is  followed  by  prom- 
ises of  forgiveness  to  repentant  Israel,  and  in  this 
connection  the  vision  of  the  great  redemption 
finds  its  starting  point  in  the  prophet's  mind. 
Paul  has  different  theological  views  in  different 
letters,  simply  because  he  was  writing  to  people 
whose  conditions  were  different.  In  the  writer's 
judgment  it  is  not  especially  important  that  all 
of  the  book  should  have  been  written  by  one  man. 
Therefore  it  is  with  no  special  zeal  of  opinion  that 
the  subject  is  considered.  But  the  simple  fact 
remains  that  there  does  not  seem  sufficient  evi- 
dence to  demand  the  conviction  that  Isaiah  may 
not  have  written  the  substantial  contents  of  the 
entire  book  which  bears  his  name. 

THE  BOOKS   OF    JEREMIAH    AND   EZEKIEL 

In  former  chapters  we  have  mentioned  the 
theories  of  the  critics  which  assign  the  author- 
ship of  Deuteronomy  to  Jeremiah.    There  is  con- 


152    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

slant  evidence  that  Jeremiah  was  familiar  with 
the  contents  of  Deuteronomy,  for  the  book  which 
carries  the  name  of  the  prophet  is  full  of  allusions 
to  the  last  book  of  the  Pentateuch.  The  discovery 
of  that  book  in  the  temple  explains  the  fact  that 
special  attention  would  be  given  to  it  by  the 
prophet  and  the  people.  Deuteronomy  was,  so  to 
speak,  their  Bible  for  the  time,  and  its  contents 
were  especially  adapted  to  their  needs.  The  stu- 
dent of  this  material  will  discover  evidences  of 
more  or  less  broken  character  to  the  record.  The 
differences  between  the  Hebrew  and  the  Greek 
texts,  later  translations,  are  quite  numerous,  the 
Greek  text  being  about  one-eighth  shorter  than 
the  Hebrew.  We  are  told  that  when  Jehoiakim 
destroyed  the  roll  which  Jeremiah  had  prepared, 
the  prophet  dictated  the  substance  again  to 
Baruch  the  scribe.  This  probably  forms  an  ear- 
lier part  of  the  book,  and  the  later  sections  sug- 
gest periods  after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  and  during 
the  exile,  as  the  time  of  authorship.  There  is  no 
such  movement  of  style  and  splendour  of  literary 
mastery  here  as  in  Isaiah,  though  there  is  dra- 
matic power  which  makes  itself  felt. 

The  book  of  Ezekiel  presents  a  mingling  of 
history  with  imagery  in  such  uncertain  manner 
as  to  leave  one  in  doubt  as  to  what  is  intended  to 
be  historic,  and  what  symbolic.  There  is  no  cri- 
terion by  which  we  can  surely  distinguish  these 
parts.  Ezekiel  exercised  a  public  ministry  among 
his  people,  beginning  previous  to  the  siege  of 


The  Major  Prophets  153 

Jerusalem,  and  continuing  after  the  fall  of  the 
city.  The  news  of  this  calamity  crushes  the 
exiles,  and  the  stern  tone  of  the  prophet  in  his 
earlier  utterances  is  changed  into  one  of  hope 
for  restoration.  Fresh  captives  swelled  the  ranks 
of  the  exiles,  and  probably  brought  the  rolls  of 
Jeremiah  to  the  Babylonian  prophet,  for  he  shows 
the  influence  of  Jeremiah  in  much  of  his  teach- 
ing. His  office  of  prophet  was  peculiar,  for  as 
an  exile  he  seems  to  have  been  a  sort  of  pastor 
to  his  fellow-exiles,  and  his  emphasis  of  his  sense 
of  responsibility  for  his  countrymen  further  sug- 
gests this  character  of  his  work.  The  unity  and 
authenticity  of  his  writings  have  been  contested 
by  very  few  critics.  The  book  bears  the  stamp 
of  a  single  mind,  and  is  arranged  in  so  clear  a  plan 
that  the  literary  design  is  apparent.  The  marvel- 
lous imagination  of  the  man  is  the  most  striking 
feature  of  the  book.  His  dominant  teaching  was 
the  giving  to  Israel  the  Messianic  hope  as  a  new 
ideal  in  the  nation's  life,  and  the  starting  point  of 
a  new  religious  development. 

THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

This  book  is  the  apocalyptic  chapter  of  the  Old 
Testament.  There  is  a  distinction  between  proph- 
ecy and  apocalypse.  Prophecy  had  immediate 
bearing  on  the  time,  and  any  picture  it  might 
present  of  the  future  was  given  as  a  warning  or 
an  incentive  in  view  of  present  conditions.  Apoc- 
alypse was  this  and  more.     It  took  on  a  more 


154    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

sublime  suggestion  of  God's  great  plan  for  the 
future,  without  so  much  of  immediate  connection 
of  current  events,  though  not  ignoring  them. 
Moreover  the  apocalypse  has  a  symbolism  of  its 
own,  built  up  by  a  fancy  different  from  the  ordi- 
nary poetic  imagination  of  the  prophet,  which 
largely  draws  its  figures  from  nature.  The  book 
of  Daniel  abounds  in  this  distinctive  symbolism 
of  the  apocalypse,  which  involves  the  nations  in 
the  great  sweep  of  the  world-movement  through 
the  ages. 

In  the  writer's  judgment  its  character  points 
to  the  time  of  the  Captivity  for  its  origin, 
rather  than  to  a  later  time,  for  after  the  return 
to  Palestine  the  nation  became  more  provincial 
than  ever,  with  narrow  visions  and  a  more  cir- 
cumscribed life.  The  book  is  written  in  two  lan- 
guages, Hebrew  and  Aramaic.  Several  explana- 
tions are  offered  for  this  unusual  fact,  but  no 
one  is  satisfactory.  Naturally  the  two  languages 
suggest  composite  authorship,  yet  the  sections  of 
language  do  not  coincide  with  the  divisions  in  the 
thought.  It  is  also  claimed  that  Daniel  is  of  much 
later  origin  because  of  the  presence  of  certain 
modern  words  in  the  text.  There  are  only  eight  of 
these  words,  and  Archdeacon  Farrar  says,  "  on 
this  part  of  the  subject  there  has  been  a  great  deal 
of  rash,  incompetent  assertion."  An  interesting 
fact  in  English  literature  may  serve  to  throw  some 
light  on  this  problem.  Chaucer's  Canterbury 
Tales  and  Piers  Ploughman  were  composed  at  the 


The  Major  Prophets  155 

same  time.  But  Chaucer  has  many  modern  words 
not  found  in  the  other  poem.  This  is  because 
Chaucer  was  at  the  Court  and  knew  foreign 
words  before  they  came  into  general  use.  Just 
so  Daniel  at  Court  would  know  some  such  words, 
which  would  not  be  found  in  the  writings  of 
Haggai  or  Malachi. 

The  general  theory  of  the  critics  is  that  the 
book  of  Daniel  is  not  history,  but  a  religious 
novel,  written  in  the  Maccabean  age.  The  fact  of 
the  two  languages  used  is  a  strong  point  against 
this  theory.  It  is  claimed  the  writer  is  describing 
Antiochus  Epiphanes  under  the  names  of  Neb- 
uchadnezzar, Belshazzar  and  Darius,  while  Dan- 
iel is  the  picture  of  the  ideal  Jew,  who  is 
meant  to  be  a  reminder  of  Joseph.  But  the  inci- 
dents fail  to  justify  this  theory,  for  it  is  based  on 
the  notion  that  the  book  is  intended  to  incite  the 
Jews  to  take  up  arms  against  Antiochus.  The 
effect  of  the  narrative  is  just  the  opposite,  lead- 
ing to  a  passive  attitude.  Moreover  Daniel  is  not 
the  ideal  Jew,  for  he  is  nowhere  concerned  about 
the  return  of  his  people  from  captivity.  The 
theory  of  the  critics  appears  to  break  down.  The 
Book  of  Baruch  is  clearly  borrowed  from  Daniel, 
and  Ewald  puts  that  in  the  Persian  period.  Hence 
Daniel  must  be  as  early.  The  abiding  inspiration 
of  the  book  is  in  its  uplifting  picture  of  the  over- 
ruling hand  of  the  God  of  nations  as  He  moves 
forward  in  the  realization  of  His  purpose  for  the 
redemption  of  His  people. 


XX 


THE  MINOR  PROPHETS 

IN  the  Hebrew  these  twelve  books  are  gathered 
under  the  common  title  The  Book  of  the 
Twelve.  The  time  of  the  collection  and  ar- 
rangement of  the  twelve  books  is  uncertain, 
though  indications  point  to  the  period  between 
300  and  250  B.  c.  The  best  discussion  of  these 
books  by  a  modern  critical  scholar  is  found  in  the 
two  volumes  from  the  pen  of  Dr.  George  Adam 
Smith.  He  places  Amos  about  755  b.  c,  Hosea 
about  745  and  Micah  about  722.  These  three  he 
pronounces  "  in  every  respect — originality,  com- 
prehensiveness, influence  upon  other  prophets — 
the  greatest  of  the  twelve."  He  follows  Micah 
with  Zephaniah,  Nahum  and  Habakkuk,  placing 
them  in  the  second  half  of  the  seventh  century, 
B.  c.  Obadiah  and  Joel  he  counts  of  uncertain 
date,  though  both  in  their  present  form  seem  to 
be  late.  Jonah  is  unique  and  to  be  placed  in  a 
class  by  itself,  while  Haggai,  Zechariah  and  Mal- 
achi  are  after  the  exile.  He  tells  us  this  arrange- 
ment does  not  mean  that  the  whole  of  a  book  be- 
longs to  the  date  given,  or  that  it  was  all  written 
by  the  man  whose  name  it  bears.  He  says: 
"  Hands  have  been  busy  with  the  texts  of  the 
156 


The  Minor  Prophets  157 

books  long  after  the  authors  of  these  must  have 
passed  away."  But  this  gives  us  the  substantial 
material  of  the  books  identified  with  the  prophets 
whose  names  they  bear. 

Dr.  Smith  says : — "  Our  Twelve  do  more  than 
carry  us  from  beginning  to  end  of  the  Prophetic 
Period.  Of  second  rank  as  are  most  of  the 
heights  of  this  mountain  range,  they  yet  bring 
forth  and  speed  on  their  way  not  a  few  of  the 
streams  of  living  water  which  have  nourished 
later  ages  and  are  flowing  to-day.  Impetuous 
cataracts  of  righteousness — let  it  roll  on  like 
water,  and  justice  as  an  everlasting  stream;  the 
irrepressible  love  of  God  to  sinful  men ;  the  perse- 
verance and  pursuits  of  His  grace ;  His  truth  that 
goes  forth  richly  upon  the  heathen ;  the  hope  of 
the  Saviour  of  mankind,  the  outpouring  of  the 
Spirit;  counsels  of  patience;  impulses  of  tender- 
ness and  of  healing;  melodies  innumerable — all 
sprang  so  strongly  that  the  world  hears  and  feels 
them  still."  When  Dr.  Smith  asserts  concerning 
these  writings  that  in  the  examination  of  the 
text  he  may  have  occasion  to  suspect  some  pas- 
sages, and  to  defend  others  which  seem  to  him 
unjustly  attacked,  we  realize  that  here,  as  else- 
where, Criticism  finds  difificulties  in  these  books 
which  have  not  yet  been  solved. 

"  The  genuineness  of  the  bulk  of  the  Book  of 
Amos  is  not  doubted  by  any  critic  "  is  the  assur- 
ance of  Dr.  Smith,  and  he  traces  a  logical  and 
historical     development    through    its    chapters. 


158    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

Hosea  consists  of  two  sections  which  differ  in 
subject-matter  and  style.  Therefore  many  critics 
hold  to  two  Hoseas,  but  Dr.  Smith  believes  in  the 
unity  of  its  authorship  because,  "  the  historic 
changes  in  Israel,  and  therefore  the  difference  of 
occasion  and  motive,  explain  fully  the  altered  out- 
look and  the  altered  style."  He  shows  that  in 
both  sections  "  the  religious  principles  are  identi- 
cal, and  many  of  the  characteristic  expressions; 
while  the  whole  book  breathes  throughout  the 
same  urgent  and  jealous  temper  which  renders 
Hosea's  personality  so  distinctive  among  the 
prophets." 

The  date  of  Micah  has  been  the  subject 
of  much  discussion.  It  is  the  opinion  of  many 
critics  that  interpolations  are  found,  and  breaks 
in  the  logical  sequence,  especially  of  chapters 
iv  and  v.  Says  Dr.  Smith :  "  We  ought  not  to 
overlook  the  remarkable  fact  that  those  who  have 
recently  written  the  fullest  monographs  on  Micah 
incline  to  believe  in  the  genuineness  of  the  book 
as  a  whole."  He  specifies  Wildeboer,  Von  Ryssel 
and  Elhorst,  and  declares  Cheyne  to  be  incorrect 
in  asserting  that  it  is  "  becoming  more  and  more 
doubtful  whether  more  than  two  or  three  frag- 
ments of  the  heterogeneous  collection  of  frag- 
ments in  chapters  iv-vii  can  have  come  from 
that  prophet."  Dr.  Smith  then  argues  at  some 
length  for  the  substantial  unity  of  the  book  as 
probably  written  by  Micah. 

The   remaining   nine   prophets   present   many 


The  Minor  Prophets  159 

difficulties  to  critical  scholarship.     Questions  of 
integrity  and  related  problems  arise,  but  the  criti- 
cal and  textual  value  of  these  books  is  not  so 
great  as  the  historical.    They  present  a  develop- 
ment of  Hebrew  prophecy  of  notable  interest. 
We  see  in  them  "  the  spirit  and  style  of  classic 
prophecy  of  Israel  gradually  dissolving  into  other 
forms  of  religious  thought  and   feeling."     The 
reader  is  referred  to  Dr.   Smith's  discussion  of 
these  subjects.     Special  mention  is  here  made  of 
his  reference  to  Jonah.    He  says :    "  In  the  Book 
of  Jonah,  though  it  is  parable  and  not  history,  we 
see  a  great  recovery  and  expansion  of  the  best 
elements  of  prophecy.     God's  character  and  Is- 
rael's true  mission  to  the  world  are  revealed  in 
the  spirit  of  Hosea,  and  of  the  Seer  of  the  Exile, 
with   much   of  the  tenderness,   the   insight,   the 
analysis  of  character  and  even  the  humour  of 
classic  prophecy.    These  qualities  raise  the  Book 
of  Jonah,  though  it  is  probably  the  last  of  the 
twelve,  to  the  highest  rank  among  them.  No  book 
is  more  worthy  to  stand  by  the  side  of  Isaiah 
xl-lv;  none  is  nearer  in  spirit  to  the  New  Tes- 
tament."    The  query  arises  as  to  whether  these 
superior  qualities  in  the  book  of  Jonah  do  not 
point  to  an  earlier  time  for  its  authorship  than 
Dr.   Smith  believes.     It  gives  evidence  of  later 
touches  in  its  present  form,  but  it  breathes  a 
different    atmosphere    from    that    of    the    other 
prophets  of  the  post-exilic  period. 

The  question  as  to  how  much  of  the  prophetic 


i6o    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

material  is  to  be  considered  history,  and  how 
much  parable  or  allegory,  naturally  arises  here. 
The  student  of  the  prophetic  writings  must  be 
impressed  by  the  fact  that  much  of  the  utterance 
of  almost  every  prophet,  as  notably  Ezekiel,  is 
a  vision,  with  its  evident  lesson,  or  a  parable  with 
its  application,  as  in  Isaiah  v.  There  are  reasons 
for  thinking  the  book  of  Jonah  is  a  parable.  The 
usual  marks  of  Old  Testament  history  are  not 
fully  present.  As  when  Christ  pictured  a  man 
going  down  to  Jericho,  with  priest  and  Samari- 
tan figuring  in  the  story ;  so  it  is  possible  to  con- 
sider this  picture  of  the  prophet  to  Nineveh,  with 
its  lesson  mainly  for  Israel,  to  bring  the  chosen 
people  to  repentance. 

Yet  there  is  something  to  be  said  in  favour 
of  the  historicity  of  the  book.  It  breathes 
an  atmosphere  of  action,  and  though  its 
scenes  are  very  dramatic  and  in  quick  suc- 
cession, yet  if  the  time  of  Jonah  be  fixed  during 
the  reign  of  Jeroboam  II,  as  in  2  Kings  xiv,  as 
suggested  by  the  statement  that  he  was  the  son 
of  Amittai,  then  the  atmosphere  of  that  "  miracle 
period  "  is  as  natural  to  his  activity  as  to  that  of 
Elijah  or  Elisha.  Christ's  reference  to  the  ex- 
perience of  Jonah  and  to  the  repentance  of  Nine- 
veh rather  go  to  show  something  more  than  a 
parable  here,  whatever  we  may  say  about  His 
custom  of  using  Old  Testament  material.  It 
is  impossible,  however,  to  prove  either  position, 
and  it  is  not  vital  to  the  lesson  of  the  book  to 


The  Minor  Prophets  i6i 

do  so.  The  message  of  the  book  cannot  be  mis- 
taken, as  it  sets  forth,  to  use  the  words  of  Dr. 
Smith,  "  God's  character  and  Israel's  true  mis- 
sion to  the  world."  Especially  here  do  we  be- 
hold the  glory  of  the  divine  mercy  shining  forth. 


XXI 

THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS 

AS  we  approach  the  New  Testament,  the 
average  man  increases  his  desire  to  be 
cautious.  He  is  convinced  that  no  es- 
sential to  the  Evangelical  faith  can  be  shaken, 
and  will  not  patiently  listen  to  unwarranted  hy- 
potheses involving  the  very  foundations  of  the 
Christian  faith.  He  is  strengthened  in  his  con- 
viction by  the  history  of  recent  discussion  regard- 
ing New  Testament  material.  In  the  year  1835 
David  Frederick  Strauss  put  forth  his  mythical 
theory  concerning  the  Gospels.  He  denied  the 
supernatural,  argued  that  the  Gospels  were  le- 
gendary, and  that  the  account  of  Jesus  came  from 
the  pious  conceptions  of  early  Christians  who 
thus  pictured  their  ideal.  The  theory  startled 
Christendom,  but  set  men  to  examining  into  the 
origin  of  the  Gospels.  Criticism  turned  to  the 
New  Testament  to  study  both  its  authenticity  and 
its  literary  character.  The  history  of  Christian- 
ity was  traced  up  the  stream  to  its  fountain  head, 
bringing  the  Gospel  material  into  the  first  cen- 
tury, and  some  of  the  letters  of  Paul  to  a  time 
within  twenty-five  years  of  the  life  of  Christ. 
Moreover  the  historic  value  of  the  Gospels  was 
162 


The  Synoptic  Gospels  163 

brought  the  more  clearly  to  the  light  in  the  em- 
phasis of  the  fact  that  in  them  Christ  is  not  de- 
scribed, but  portrayed.  They  do  not  tell  us  that 
His  words  and  deeds  were  grand  and  splendid; 
but  they  simply  record  what  He  said  and  did, 
and  we  at  once  realize  the  sublime,  the  divine 
character  of  it  all.  Now  either  Christ  said  these 
things,  or  the  Gospel  writers  must  have  been 
able  to  originate  His  teachings.  In  Greek  phil- 
osophy either  Socrates  spoke  the  words  which 
Plato  reports,  or  Plato  himself  was  as  great  as 
Socrates  is  represented.  But  who  could  have 
conceived  of  the  teachings  of  Jesus  in  His  time? 
Not  a  Pharisee,  whose  conception  of  religion  He 
condemned.  Not  a  Sadducee  who  denied  the 
resurrection.  Not  an  Essene  with  his  ascetic  no- 
tions. Not  the  uneducated  fishermen  of  Galilee. 
No !  the  face  of  the  record  reveals  the  power  of 
the  truth  in  a  plain  simple  narrative  of  what 
Jesus  said  and  did.  It  portrays  a  sinless,  match- 
less life,  the  manifestation  of  God  in  the  flesh. 
This  is  the  verdict  of  Christendom.  The  theory 
of  Strauss  is  dead  and  buried. 

But  Strauss  gave  an  impulse  to  critical  study 
which  developed  through  Bauer  and  the  Tiiben- 
gen  school  to  the  later  critics  in  Germany  and 
England.  These  men  steadily  pressed  back  to 
the  historic  facts,  and  sought  to  ascertain  the 
real  historic  value  of  the  material.  Earlier 
scholarship,  with  scholastic  method,  had  dealt  in 
the  main  with  philosophical  and  theological  ques- 


164    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

lions  about  the  person  of  Christ,  and  other  doc- 
trinal themes,  but  the  new  Criticism  examined  the 
sources  of  the  record  itself.  As  the  work  went 
on,  the  personal  Christ  became  more  manifestly 
the  explanation  of  all  that  was  preeminent  in  the 
Apostolic  age.  In  his  scholarly  book  The  Place 
of  Christ  in  Modern  Theology,  Dr.  Fairbaim 
says :  "  The  life  is  a  most  manifest  effect,  exist- 
ent in  all  the  apostles,  creating  a  new  literary 
capability,  a  new  ethical,  social,  religious  spirit, 
a  society  of  brother  missionaries,  possessed  of  the 
enthusiasm  to  heal  and  save.  And  once  thought 
enters  into  the  meaning  of  this  new  life  and  its 
value  for  humanity,  it  is  forced  back  on  its  cause, 
and  compelled  to  see  that  without  Christ  the 
greatest  movement  in  history  has  neither  a  be- 
ginning nor  an  end."  The  fact  of  Christ  was 
recognized.  The  question  then  was — What  are 
the  facts  about  Christ? 

The  material  containing  the  record  of  these 
facts  is  conceded  to  be  mainly  in  the  three  synop- 
tic Gospels.  The  historic  value  of  John's  Gospel 
will  be  considered  separately.  It  is  much  later 
than  the  other  three.  When  we  approach  the 
theories  of  the  critics  regarding  the  synoptic 
records,  a  word  of  warning  must  be  raised 
against  the  work  presented  in  the  new  Encyclo- 
pedia Biblica  published  under  the  general  super- 
vision of  Dr.  Cheyne.  It  is  likely  to  command 
wide  attention,  as  it  will  assume  to  be  an  au- 
thority on  the  subject.     But  its  criticism  of  the 


The  Synoptic  Gospels  165 

Gospels  is  so  very  extreme  as  to  leave  no  hope 
that  men  will  have  any  fair  idea  of  the  various 
views  held  by  scholars  on  the  subject. 

The  two  writers  are  Dr.  E.  A.  Abbott,  whose 
sphere  is  the  "  descriptive  and  analytical,"  and 
Dr.   Schmiedel,   of  Zurich,  who  deals   with  the 
*'  historical   and   synthetical."     Dr.   Abbott    says 
Matthew's  account  of  the  resurrection  has  been 
modified  by  later  writers  "  so  as  to  soften  some  of 
its  improbabilities."    He  claims  that  the  omission 
by  the  other  evangelists  of  the  account  of  the 
healing  of  the  ear  of  Malchus,  recorded  by  Luke, 
is  "  almost  fatal  to  its  authenticity,"  and  he  ex- 
plains it  by  a  corruption  of  the  text  which  trans- 
forms the  replacing  of  the  sword  into  a  replac- 
ing of  the  ear !    He  thinks  many  of  the  miracles 
connected  with  raising  of  the  dead  are  "  very 
early  exaggerations  arising  from  misunderstood 
metaphor,"  and  finds  himself    obliged    to    pro- 
nounce the  raising  of  the  son  of  the  widow  of 
Nain  as  **  non-historical,"  while  the  record  of  the 
resurrection  of  Lazarus  is  "  mainly  allegorical." 
Dr.   Schmiedel  is  even  more  radical  and  de- 
structive.    He  says  he  does  not  start  with  '*  the 
postulate  or  axiom  that  miracles  are  impossible," 
but  he  offers  the  opinion  that  "  some  doubts  as  to 
the  accuracy  of  the  miraculous   cannot   fail  to 
arise  in  the  mind  of  even  the  strongest  believer 
in  miracles."     He  claims  that  these  alleged  con- 
tradictions "  show  only  too  clearly    with    what 
lack  of  concern  for  historical  precision  the  evan- 


1 66    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

gelists  wrote."  He  develops  the  theory  that  all 
the  post-resurrection  appearances  were  visions 
like  that  of  Paul,  and  in  many  other  views  he 
practically  destroys  the  ground  for  the  evangel- 
ical faith  in  the  Gospels. 

In  reviewing  this  article,  Principal  Fair- 
bairn  says :  "  Dr.  Abbott  proves  himself  a 
sort  of  modern  highly  erudite  and  skeptical 
Talmudist;  while  Schmiedel,  whose  articles 
are  amazingly  clever  and  even  brilliant,  shows 
himself  a  hard  and  dry,  yet  almost  a  fierce 
and  truculent  rationalist."  He  further  says  of 
Schmiedel  that  one  feels  "  the  wonderful  absence 
of  historical  Criticism,  as  qualifying  his  literary. 
It  is  marvellous  to  us  that  he  so  little  grasps  the 
movement  of  events  or  reads  his  documents  in 
relation  to  them.  All  this  is  the  easiest  and 
flimsiest  of  historical  Criticism;  violent  in  its 
exegesis,  arbitrary  in  its  selection  of  its  founda- 
tion pillars,  and  impossible  of  application  to  the 
history  it  despises."  When  a  man  like  Dr.  Fair- 
bairn,  who  is  open-minded  and  sympathetic  to- 
ward the  critical  movement,  is  compelled  to  use 
such  denunciatory  words  concerning  this  latest 
product  of  Criticism,  the  average  man  naturally 
concludes  that  the  extreme  critics  will  always  be 
repudiated  by  even  the  most  liberal  Evangelical 
Christians,  and  finds  his  confidence  strengthened 
by  this  assurance. 

The  general  theory  of  the  Evangelical  critics 
regarding  the  three  synoptic  Gospels  is  presen- 


The  Synoptic  Gospels  167 

ted  admirably  by  Dr.  McGiffert  in  The  Apostolic 
Age.     In  substantial  agreement  with  his  state- 
ment is  that  of  Dr.  Bruce  in  The  Expositor's 
Greek    Testament.       The    earliest    records    of 
Christ's  teachings  were  contained  in  the  so-called 
Logia,  or  sayings  of  Jesus.     The  first  writer  to 
mention  them  is  Papias  of  Hierapolis,  a  writer 
of    the    early    second    century.      Eusebius,    the 
Church  historian,  our  best  authority  on  the  pa- 
tristic writings,  tells  us  that  Papias  records  that 
"  Matthew  composed  the  Logia  in  the  Hebrew 
language,  and  every  one  interpreted  them  as  best 
he  could."    Dr.  IMcGiffert  says :  "  It  is  clear  that 
they  were  intended  primarily   for    disciples    of 
Jewish  birth,  and  more  particularly  for  residents 
of  Palestine."    And  he  adds :  "  They  were  known 
and  used  at  an  early  day  by  those  also  whose 
every  day  speech  was  Greek.     Papias  tells  us 
that  every  one  interpreted  them  as  best  he  could. 
But  it  could  not  be  long  after  they  had  made 
their  way  into  the  Greek  speaking  world  before 
Greek  translations  of  them  were  put  into  writing 
for  the  use  of  those  who  knew  no  Hebrew,  and 
who  were  unable  to  interpret  them   for  them- 
selves." 

He  continues:  "It  is  hardly  to  be  sup- 
posed that  no  other  collections  of  Christ's  words 
were  made  than  the  Logia  of  Matthew.  It  is 
probable  that  Luke  used  another  source  than 
the  Logia  in  chapters  iv-xvii  of  his  Gospel, 
and  that  he  drew  from  it,  for  instance,  the  par- 


1 68    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

ables  of  the  Good  Samaritan,  the  fooHsh  rich 
man,  the  prodigal  son,  the  unrighteous  steward, 
Dives  and  Lazarus,  the  unjust  judge,  and  the 
Pharisee  and  Publican.  Most  of  these  parables 
bear  a  common  character  which  distinguishes 
them  from  those  recorded  in  the  Logia,  and 
which  points  to  a  compiler  of  a  somewhat  broader 
spirit  and  more  humanistic  temper  than  Mat- 
thew; to  one  who  belonged  in  fact  to  another 
circle,  and  was  in  touch  with  mission  work  in 
the  world  at  large." 

Dr.  McGiffert,  here  as  elsewhere,  keeps  in 
mind  certain  facts  which  do  not  seem  to  have  so 
much  place  in  the  work  of  many  critics.  In  a 
valuable  little  book  Why  Four  Gospels?  Dr.  D. 
S.  Gregory  presents  a  series  of  these  suggestive 
facts  which  are  very  instructive.  He  reminds 
us  that  the  spread  of  Christianity  was  from  three 
main  centres — Jerusalem,  Antioch  and  Rome, 
where  the  Gospel  was  preached  to  the  Jews, 
Greeks  and  Romans.  Naturally  the  predilec- 
tions, education  and  national  traits  of  these  three 
types  of  people  would  have  much  to  do  with 
giving  special  emphasis  upon  different  parts  of 
the  Gospel  story.  Matthew's  record  is  a  perma- 
nent report  of  the  way  the  Gospel  was  generally 
preached  to  the  Jews.  Its  key  note  is  the  ful- 
fillment of  prophecy.  Its  teachings  are  espe- 
cially adapted  to  the  Jews,  and  several  of  these 
do  not  appear  in  Mark  or  Luke,  whose  readers 
would  not  respond  to  them  as  would  the  Jews. 


The  Synoptic  Gospels  169 

Matthew  contains  no  explanation  of  Hebrew 
words  or  Jewish  customs,  or  comments  upon 
Jewish  geography,  while  all  three  of  the  other 
Gospels  contain  these  for  people  not  familiar  with 
Jerusalem  and  Palestine. 

The  key  note  of  Mark  is  power.  His 
record  has  a  very  small  amount  of  Christ's 
teaching,  but  throbs  with  energy  in  the  rec- 
ord of  His  deeds.  The  spirit  of  the  Roman  is 
in  mind  as  the  narrative  moves  forward.  It  is 
the  Roman  centurion  at  the  cross  who  is  re- 
ported only  by  Mark  as  exclaiming  "  Truly  this 
man  was  the  Son  of  God ! "  Luke,  as  Dr.  Mc- 
Giffert  points  out,  has  much  material  not  found 
in  either  of  the  other  two.  His  dominant  tone 
is  the  broader  humanity  of  the  Greeks.  Divide 
Luke  into  one  hundred  parts,  and  only  forty-one 
parts  are  in  common  with  the  other  Gospels, 
while  fifty-nine  parts  are  peculiar  to  itself.  Luke 
gives  us  the  only  specific  account  of  the  Perean 
ministry. 

Now  all  this  points  not  only  to  a  degree  of  in- 
dependence in  authorship  not  recognized  by 
many  critics,  but  points  as  well  to  an  original 
purpose  in  each  Gospel  which  gives  it  a  unity  and 
value  too  little  appreciated.  The  oral  Gospel,  re- 
peated through  twenty  or  thirty  years,  must  have 
become  crystallized  into  familiar  forms  of  state- 
ments, aside  from  any  written  reports,  and 
marked  by  distinctive  colourings  in  the  different 
sections  of  the  world  where  it    was    preached. 


lyo    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

These  differences  are  so  marked  that  we  cannot 
overlook  them,  and  they  demand  consideration  in 
the  study  of  their  historic  value.  The  differences 
in  the  three  records  only  strengthen  their  his- 
toric validity  in  the  light  of  their  local  settings, 
and  the  reader  discovers  the  fulness  of  the  ac- 
count only  as  he  combines  all  three  of  them,  and 
appreciates  that  they  are  not  contradictory,  but 
supplementary. 

When  Luke  presents  a  different  version 
of  the  Lord's  Prayer,  for  instance,  it  in- 
dicates that  he  did  not  have  the  same  source 
that  Matthev^  used,  but  that  he  had  received  the 
truth  from  reliable  tradition,  whether  spoken  or 
written,  for  the  same  truth  is  preserved,  though 
the  exact  words  are  not  used.  The  theory  that 
Mark  was  the  foundation  of  the  records,  and 
that  Matthew  and  Luke  both  built  on  Mark, 
may  or  may  not  be  correct.  There  are  evidences, 
such  as  these  suggested,  pointing  to  an  inde- 
pendent record  in  each  case,  gathered  from  the 
same  general  sources  perhaps,  but  by  no  means 
certainly  dependent  on  Mark  or  the  Logia  of 
Matthew.  The  great  fact  to  be  emphasized  is 
that  critical  scholarship  is  practically  agreed  in 
fixing  the  historical  material  in  the  second  half 
of  the  first  century,  where  we  have  it  much 
nearer  to  the  time  of  Girist  than  we  now  are  to 
the  signing  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence. 
The  historic  basis  for  our  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ 
is  forever  established. 


XXII 

THE   ACTS   OF   THE  APOSTLES 

THE  book  of  the  Acts  of  The  Apostles  is 
the  Index  to  the  development  of  the 
Christian  Church  during  the  apostolic 
age.  Along  the  lines  there  briefly  indicated  the 
work  was  carried  on.  Much  ground  is  traversed, 
but  there  is  sufficient  statement  to  explain  the 
cardinal  facts  in  the  history,  especially  when  we 
consider  the  additional  light  furnished  in  the 
several  apostolic  epistles,  most  of  which  were 
probably  written  before  this  record  was  pre- 
pared. One  opinion  prevailed  in  the  early  Church 
regarding  the  authorship,  namely  that  Luke  the 
writer  of  the  third  Gospel  was  the  author  of  this 
book.  This  view  is  still  maintained  by  a  large 
majority  of  leading  critics.  Some  however  do 
not  believe  the  author  was  the  companion  of 
Paul,  and  among  these  is  Dr.  McGiffert.  His 
reasons  do  not  seem  very  conclusive,  and  illus- 
trate his  method  at  times,  to  the  disappointment 
of  the  average  man. 

Dr.   McGiffert   says  the  supposition   that  the 

writer  was  a  companion  of  Paul  is  "  beset  with 

serious  difficulties,   for  the  knowledge  of  events 

displayed  by  the  author  is  less  accurate  and  com- 

171 


172    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

plete  than  might  be  expected  in  one  who  had 
been  personally  associated  for  any  length  of 
time  with  Paul  himself."  ..."  His  work 
betrays  a  lack  of  knowledge  concerning  the 
latter  part  of  Paul's  career,  during  which 
the  author  of  the  "  we "  passages  must  have 
been  intimately  associated  with  him,  at  least  a 
part  of  the  time;  and  certain  critical  periods  in 
Paul's  life  are  treated  as  we  should  hardly  ex- 
pect them  to  be  by  one  of  his  own  companions. 
It  seems  therefore  necessary  to  conclude  that  the 
author  of  the  Acts  was  not  identical  with  the 
eyewitness  who  appears  in  certain  parts  of  the 
book." 

When  we  discover  the  reason  for  Dr.  McGif- 
fert's  opinion  to  be  his  disappointment  in  not 
finding  what  he  would  expect  a  companion  of 
Paul  to  write,  and  that  this  or  that  account  is  not 
satisfactory  to  him,  we  wonder  who  shall  say 
what  ought  to  be  expected  of  Paul's  companion. 
Who  shall  assume  that  he  ought  to  have  dwelt 
more  fully  upon  certain  parts  of  Paul's  career? 
Who  is  to  decide  what  the  New  Testament  ought 
to  contain?  Dr.  George  T.  Purves,  in  his  little 
book  The  Apostolic  Age,  says :  "  The  objection 
that  a  companion  of  Paul  ought  to  have  given 
fuller  information,  and  that  he  even  shows  igno- 
rance of  much  that  such  a  man  would  have 
known,  proceeds  on  an  arbitrary  assumption  con- 
cerning what  Luke  would  be  likely  to  record, 
and  a  failure  to  appreciate  the  plan  and  purpose 


The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  173 

of  the  book."  Renan  asserts  it  to  be  "  beyond 
doubt  that  this  author  is  in  very  deed  Luke  the 
disciple  of  Paul."  Both  Professors  Ramsay  and 
Blass  hold  to  this  view,  together  with  many 
others. 

Certain  facts  go  to  prove  the  reasonable- 
ness of  this  view.  In  four  passages  the  writer 
represents  himself  as  the  companion  of  Paul. 
The  phraseology  of  these  sections  is  in  many  re- 
spects common  to  that  employed  in  the  rest  of 
the  book.  Sir  J.  Hawkins  specifies  seventeen 
words  and  phrases  which  appear  in  both  the 
"  we  "  passages  and  in  the  rest  of  the  Acts,  but 
nowhere  else  in  the  New  Testament.  He  also 
points  out  twenty-seven  words  and  phrases  found 
in  the  "  we "  passages  and  in  Luke's  Gospel, 
with  or  without  the  rest  of  the  Acts.  Those  who 
deny  the  identity  of  authorship  must  account  for 
this  similarity  of  style,  and  also  for  the  appear- 
ance of  the  "  we  "  passages  at  all.  For  if  the 
writer  of  the  rest  of  the  book  had  wished  to  ap- 
pear a  companion  of  Paul,  he  would  not  have  in- 
serted the  "  we  "  only  at  these  four  points.  The 
German  philologist,  Vogel,  states  the  common 
sense  view  of  the  matter  when  he  says  that  when 
a  writer  with  the  skill  which  is  manifest  in  this 
book  passes  from  the  third  to  the  first  person 
in  his  narrative,  every  unprejudiced  reader  will 
explain  it  on  the  ground  that  the  author  thus 
wished  modestly  to  intimate  his  own  personal 
presence  during  certain  events.    Another  fact  is 


174    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

that  the  writer  was  so  familiar  with  his  facts  that 
he  did  not  feel  any  need  of  using  the  epistles 
of  Paul,  for  Acts  is  written  independently  of 
those  epistles,  though  most  of  them  were  avail- 
able. 

This  fact  suggests  the  probable  time  of  the 
authorship  of  the  Acts.  The  author  stood  suf- 
ficiently near  to  Paul's  time  to  write  without 
drawing  upon  the  Pauline  epistles.  Dr.  McGif- 
fert  would  place  the  time  of  the  authorship  as 
late  as  the  beginning  of  the  second  century.  But 
his  teacher,  Prof.  Harnack,  brings  the  date  down 
to  about  the  year  80,  and  that  time  is  generally 
accepted  by  the  majority  of  scholars.  It  is 
reasonable  to  hold  that  the  date  must  be  placed 
after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  as  the  references  to 
that  event  by  Luke's  Gospel  would  indicate  that 
it  was  past,  and  the  Acts  must  be  placed  some 
years  later.  In  Matthew  xxiv:i5,  we  read: 
"  When  ye  shall  see  the  abomination  of  desola- 
tion, spoken  of  by  Daniel  the  prophet,  stand  in 
the  holy  place,"  etc.  But  in  Luke  xxi :  20,  we 
read :  "  When  ye  shall  see  Jerusalem  compassed 
with  armies,  then  know  that  the  desolation 
thereof  is  nigh."  Here  the  reasonable  inference 
is  that  Luke's  record  reads  in  the  light  of  ac- 
complished history,  so  that  the  third  Gospel 
would  be  placed  about  the  year  70  or  a  little 
later,  and  Acts  may  reasonably  be  assigned  to 
about  80.  There  are  a  few  critics  who  have  at- 
tempted to  point  out  specific  sources    for    this 


The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  175 

book,  but  their  efforts  are  most  unsatisfactory. 
We  can  only  surmise  as  to  Luke's  sources  of  in- 
formation regarding  those  items  in  the  record 
beyond  his  personal  knowledge. 

As  to  the  historic  value  of  the  book  it  will  suf- 
fice to  quote  from  Prof.  Ramsay  who  writes  in 
Recent  Research  in  Bible  Lands  regarding  Paul's 
missionary  journeys :  "  It  has  already  ceased  to 
be  possible  for  a  rational  criticism  to  maintain 
that  the  narrative  of  these  journeys  is  a  free 
second-century  composition;  and  it  is  rapidly 
ceasing  to  be  possible  to  regard  it  as  a  series  of 
first-century  scraps,  pieced  together  by  a  second- 
century  compiler  for  his  own  purposes.  Only  a 
narrative  written  with  full  mastery  by  an  eye- 
witness, or  by  one  who  was  in  communication 
with  eyewitnesses,  and  able  to  use  their  accounts 
with  delicate  precision  could  stand  the  minute 
study  that  is  now  demanded  and  applied.  It  is 
not  a  new  discovery  that  the  perplexing  variety 
of  titles  for  governors  and  magistrates  of  cities 
is  correct  in  every  case  throughout  the  book ;  but 
it  is  now  becoming  far  clearer  than  before  that 
the  duties,  powers,  and  character  of  the  officials 
are  all  correctly  delineated.  Recent  discoveries 
are  enabling  us  to  conceive  precisely  what  these 
officials  were  in  actual  life;  and  each  new  step 
in  our  knowledge  only  makes  the  narrative  of 
Acts  more  luminous."  ..."  The  very  language 
of  Acts  is  that  of  a  person  who  had  travelled  in 
the  country,  and  not  one  who  had  gathered  his 


176    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

knowledge  from  books."  Thus  we  rest  in  the 
trustworthy  account  of  the  steps  by  which  the 
Christian  Church  was  established  and  developed. 
In  connection  with  this  account  in  the  Acts 
of  the  early  history  of  the  Christian  Church,  we 
must  consider  the  conspicuous  fact  which  has 
figured  so  largely  in  the  critical  discussions  of 
New  Testament  problems :  namely  the  difference 
which  marked  the  two  great  tendencies  in  the 
church,  the  Judaistic  and  the  universal.  The 
first  colouring  of  the  Christian  thought  and  life 
was  Jewish.  The  primary  message  was  that 
Jesus  was  the  Messiah.  The  first  Christians  were 
Jews  who  never  thought  of  departing  from  their 
ancient  customs.  Yet  their  Christianity  placed 
them  into  a  new  class  of  Jews.  They  recognized 
the  Jewish  law  as  still  binding  upon  them.  But 
their  emphasis  of  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  de- 
veloped an  opposition  on  the  part  of  the  Sad- 
ducees,  who  denied  the  resurrection.  The  ston- 
ing of  Stephen  marked  the  outbreak  of  the  spirit 
of  persecution,  which  was  followed  by  the  dis- 
persion. The  awakening  of  the  missionary  spirit 
was  intensified,  as  it  was  evident  that  the  gift  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  was  bestowed  upon  Samaritans 
and  Gentiles,  as  well  as  Jews. 

When  Cornelius  was  received  into  the 
Church,  being  neither  Jew  nor  proselyte,  the 
need  of  a  future  policy  became  imperative. 
Could  Gentiles  be  Christians  without  going 
through    the    door    of    Judaism?      This    was 


The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  177 

the  great  question.  Meanwhile  Paul  had  been 
converted,  and  was  preaching  the  Gospel  to 
the  Gentiles  with  great  results.  The  apostles 
recognized  Gentiles  as  Christians  because  of  the 
gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  did  not  allow  that 
Jewish  Christians  could  violate  any  Jewish  law, 
for  instance,  to  eat  with  a  Gentile,  though  both 
were  Christians.  At  Antioch,  where  **  the  dis- 
ciples were  first  called  Christians,"  the  uncircum- 
cised  Christians  could  not  be  allowed  to  fellow- 
ship with  the  Jews.  The  seriousness  of  this 
situation  is  at  once  apparent. 

The  process  of  emancipation  into  the  true 
liberty  of  the  Gospel  came  slowly,  and  mainly 
through  the  instrumentality  of  Paul.  Paul  was 
the  most  cosmopolitan  Christian  of  the  first  gen- 
eration of  followers  of  Christ.  He  was  a  Jew 
who  was  a  Roman  citizen  living  in  a  Greek  city. 
He  could  not  well  be  provincial,  yet  he  was  an 
intense  Jew,  as  his  first  contact  with  Christianity, 
as  a  persecutor,  bore  witness.  His  conversion 
was  most  thoroughgoing.  The  whole  man  was 
in  all  he  did  before  and  after.  Concerning  this 
vital  experience  of  the  apostle,  Dr.  McGiffert,  in 
a  passage  of  great  power,  says :  "  It  is  clear  from 
Rom.  vii :  7,  sq.,  that,  zealous  as  Paul  was  in  the 
observance  of  the  Jewish  law,  and  blameless  as 
his  conduct  was  when  measured  by  an  external 
standard,  he  had  become  conscious  that  all  his 
efiForts  to  attain  to  righteousness  were  a  complete 
failure.    This  consciousness  was  evidently  the  re- 


lyS    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

suit  of  his  perception  of  the  fact,  which  was  en- 
tirely overlooked  by  the  majority  of  his  contem- 
poraries, and  may  have  been  long  overlooked  by 
Paul  himself,  that  inner,  as  well  as  outer  sins, 
sins  of  heart  as  well  as  of  deed,  were  forbidden  by 
the  law;  that  the  tenth  commandment  made 
covetousness  and  lust  a  crime,  even  though  the 
lust  or  the  covetousness  never  manifested  itself 
in  acts  of  sensuality  or  of  dishonesty." 

"  That  Paul,  trained  as  he  was  in  the 
superficial,  legal  conceptions  of  the  Pharisees 
of  his  day,  should  have  recognized  this  fact, 
is  a  mark  of  the  profoundness  of  his  ethical 
nature,  and  distinguishes  him  from  most  of 
his  fellows.  Only  a  great  religious  genius 
could  thus  have  penetrated  beneath  the  husk 
of  formality  to  the  vital  kernel  within.  It 
is  clear  that  he  was  no  ordinary  Pharisee. 
The  condemnation  which  Jesus  passed  upon 
the  Pharisees  as  a  class  could  not  have  been 
pronounced  upon  him.  Even  though  a 
Pharisee,  he  was  a  man  after  Christ^s  own  heart. 
Though  he  apparently  knew  nothing  as  yet  about 
Jesus's  teaching,  he  had  reached  the  principle  of 
which  Jesus  had  made  so  much,  that  all  external 
observance  of  the  law  is  worthless  unless  it  be 
based  upon  the  obedience  of  the  heart." 

After  discussing  Paul's  struggle,  and  his  dual- 
istic  ideas  regarding  the  flesh  and  the  spirit, 
leading  up  to  his  appreciation  of  the  deliverance 
which  is  in    Christ,  Dr.   McGiffert    continues: 


The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  179 

**  But  how  was  the  action  of  the  Messiah  to 
effect  that  deliverance  of  which  Paul  thus  felt 
assured?  It  was  in  answering  this  question  that 
Paul  departed  most  widely  from  the  thought  of 
all  his  predecessors  and  contemporaries;  that  he 
showed  himself  almost  independent  of  outside 
influence  and  revealed  most  clearly  his  religious 
individuality  and  originality.  Christ  saves  a 
man,  he  says,  by  entering  and  taking  up  His 
abode  within  him,  by  binding  him  indissolubly 
to  Himself,  so  that  it  is  no  longer  he  that  lives, 
but  Christ  that  lives  in  him,  so  that  whatever 
Christ  does,  he  does,  and  whatever  he  does 
Christ  does. 

'*  To  have  believed  that  the  work  of  Christ 
was  only  substitutionary  in  its  significance; 
to  have  believed  that  there  was  only  an  arbitrary 
and  forensic  connection  between  the  work  of 
Christ  and  the  salvation  of  men,  would  have  been 
to  do  violence  to  his  most  sacred  convictions, 
and  to  run  counter  to  all  his  religious  expe- 
rience. ...  To  this  experience  he  gives  clear 
and  vivid  expression  in  such  striking  utterances 
as  the  following :  *  When  it  pleased  God  to  re- 
veal His  Son  (not  to  me,  but)  in  me; '  *  I  have 
been  crucified  with  Christ,  yet  I  live ;  and  yet  no 
longer  I,  but  Christ  liveth  in  me ; '  '  God  sent 
forth  the  spirit  of  His  Son  into  our  hearts ;  *  '  If 
Christ  is  in  you,  the  body  is  dead  because  of 
sin;  but  the  spirit  is  life  because  of  righteous- 


i8o    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

This  conception  of  Paul's  personal  experience 
throws  light  upon  his  whole  attitude  toward  the 
law  and  ceremonial  as  related  to  the  follower  of 
Christ,  as  emphasized  in  his  letters  to  the  Romans 
and  Galatians.  The  law  serves  to  reveal  a  man's 
sin.  He  dies,  not  because  he  has  broken  a  law, 
but  because  he  is  sinful.  In  Christ  he  dies  to 
sin,  and  in  the  risen  Christ  he  enters  into  a  new- 
ness of  life,  in  which  he  is  no  longer  under  law, 
but  in  the  Spirit  of  Christ  under  a  perfect  law 
of  Hberty.  It  inevitably  followed  upon  all  this 
that  Paul  could  no  longer  hold  to  a  difference 
between  circumcision  and  uncircumcision  in 
Christ.  Jew  and  Gentile,  Greek  and  barbarian 
are  all  one  in  Christ.  Paul's  contention  with 
Peter  at  Antioch,  because  Peter  had  entered  into 
the  larger  truth,  only  to  yield  it  at  the  behest  of 
narrow  Judaizers,  was  the  consistent  contention 
of  one  who  had  come  to  see  clearly  that  the  old 
forms  had  no  longer  an  essential  place  for  the 
Christian.  As  has  been  said,  this  twofold  tend- 
ency was  in  the  Church,  and  it  became  largely  a 
Pauline  and  anti-Pauline  controversy.  Paul's 
apostleship  was  sometimes  challenged  by  those 
who  opposed  him ;  but  he,  standing  unflinchingly 
for  his  position,  maintained  it  victoriously  unto 
the  end.  The  marks  of  this  difference  of  view 
are  found  in  the  New  Testament  writings,  and 
are  often  held  to  be  important  in  helping  to  de- 
termine questions  of  authorship  and  date.  It  is 
a  most  instructive  picture  of  the  progress  of  the 
emancipating  truth. 


XXIII 

THE  WRITINGS  OF  JAMES^  PETER  AND  JUDE 

THE  twenty-seven  books  now  composing 
the  New  Testament  were  officially  rec- 
ognized as  the  authoritative  Canon  at 
the  Council  of  Laodicea  in  the  year  363.  But 
the  Canon  was  really  fixed  before  that  date. 
These  books  had  gravitated  together  by  virtue  of 
their  inherent  divine  authority,  and  their  limited 
number  was  fixed  by  the  response  of  the  Church 
to  the  evidence  of  divine  inspiration.  Some  apoc- 
ryphal books  were  frequently  used  with  approval, 
but  it  is  significant  that  at  no  time  did  the  whole 
Church  ever  recognize  as  authoritative  Scriptures 
any  other  books  than  those  now  found  in  the 
New  Testament.  The  diflference  in  the  atmos- 
phere is  marked  as  one  passes  from  an  apocryphal 
writing  to  one  of  these  productions,  even  in  the 
two  or  three  instances  where  there  was  some 
hesitation  about  their  right  to  a  place  in  the 
Canon.  Thus  these  twenty-seven  books  have  be- 
come the  accepted  true  deposit  of  the  divine 
revelation.  There  is  no  reason  to  believe  that 
any  facts  will  ever  come  to  light  to  disturb  their 
place  in  the  Canon. 

A  very  wide  spread  opinion  would  place  the 
181 


1 82    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

Epistle  of  James  as  the  earliest  of  these  writings. 
There  are  those  indeed  who  hold  to  its  late  au- 
thorship. Dr.  McGiifert  gives  the  reasons  for 
advocating  a  late  date  to  be  (i)  the  extreme 
worldliness  of  those  addressed,  which  seems  to 
indicate  a  lapse  of  time  since  their  conversion; 
and  (2)  the  passage  on  faith  and  works  which 
apparently  presupposes  the  teaching  of  Paul,  and 
the  wide-spread  abuse  of  that  teaching.  Against 
the  assumption  that  James  the  brother  of  Jesus 
wrote  the  epistle  he  argues  because  of  its  re- 
markable silence  about  Jesus.  "  The  ethical  tone 
and  standard  of  the  work  are  noble  and  inspir- 
ing, and  in  many  respects  closely  allied  to  the 
teaching  of  Jesus;  but  it  is  not  easy  to  under- 
stand, and  it  is  not  altogether  agreeable  to  con- 
template the  fact  that  a  man  who  knew  Jesus 
intimately  should  show  no  trace  of  the  influence 
of  the  Master's  wonderful  personality." 

Many  scholars,  however,  urge  an  early  date  for 
the  epistle  on  the  grounds :  ( i )  that  it  presents  a 
very  slight  Hne  between  Judaism  and  Christian- 
ity. (2)  It  is  marked  by  an  absence  of  definite 
Christian  phraseology.  (3)  There  is  an  ab- 
sence of  dogmatic  teaching,  such  as  marks  the 
letters  of  Paul  and  John.  (4)  There  is  no  ref- 
erence whatever  to  Gentile  Christianity.  It  was 
written  only  to  Christians  who  were  Jews,  and 
points  to  a  time  previous  to  the  Council  at  Je- 
rusalem. As  to  the  discussion  of  faith  and 
works,  PauFs  is  more  elaborate,  which  is  an  in- 


The  Writings  of  James,  Peter  and  Jude  183 

dication  that  James  wrote  first.  The  supposed 
contradiction  between  these  two  apostles  has 
long  since  been  shown  to  be  imaginary.  The  ref- 
erences to  Christ  in  i:  i,  ii:  i,  and  v:8  are  all 
of  such  worshipful  character  as  to  indicate  a  full 
appreciation  of  the  "  wonderful  personality  "  of 
the  Master.  The  subject  does  not  call  for  such 
mention  of  Christ's  teaching  as  might  be  nat- 
urally demanded  by  other  themes.  On  the 
whole,  the  general  opinion  which  attributes  the 
letter  to  James,  and  considers  it  one  of  the 
earliest  of  the  New  Testament  writings,  would 
seem  to  be  sustained. 

The  First  Epistle  of  Peter  is  also  marked  by 
what  may  be  called  a  practical  purpose,  rather 
than  the  intention  to  set  forth  any  special  theo- 
logical teaching.       He    is    writing    for    the    en- 
couragement and  inspiration  of  those  who  are 
enduring    persecution,    and    his    watch-word    is 
hope.    James  iv :  6  is  exactly  quoted  in  i  Peter 
V :  5,  indicating  acquaintance  with    the    former. 
Moreover  many  of  Paul's  characteristic  expres- 
sions appear,  as  "  having  been  begotten  again, 
not  of  corruptible  seed,  but  of  incorruptible,"  and 
"  Who  his  own  self  carried  our  sins  in  his  body 
up  to  the  tree,  that  we,  having  died  unto  sins, 
might  live  unto  righteousness."     The  writer  de- 
scribes himself  as  ''  Peter,  an  apostle  of  Jesus 
Christ,"  and  the  epistle  is  marked  by  many  ex- 
pressions which  recall  the  words  of  Christ  Him- 
self,   suggesting    a   personal    contact    with    the 


184    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

Master.  There  is  also  an  occasional  resemblance 
between  the  language  of  the  epistle  and  that 
found  in  Peter's  sermons  recorded  in  the  Acts. 
Some  of  these  are  uncommon  words,  as  when 
Peter  speaks  of  the  cross  as  the  tree,  both  in  the 
epistle  and  the  sermon.  His  words  are  forcible, 
but  simple  and  direct.  He  assimilates  Old  Tes- 
tament thought,  without  caring  to  quote  accu- 
rately. 

The  resemblance  to  Paul's  style  and  thought 
has  been  urged  against  the  Petrine  author- 
ship; but  there  is  decided  originality,  aside 
from  any  colouring  which  reveals  familiarity 
with  the  teachings  of  other  apostles.  There  are 
about  sixty  words  peculiar  to  the  epistle,  which 
indicates  marked  originality.  In  writing  to  those 
who  had  been  especially  under  the  influence  of 
Paul,  Peter  most  wisely  incorporated  much  of 
the  familiar  teaching  of  that  apostle.  The  salu- 
tation and  tone  of  the  letter  would  indicate  that 
Peter  had  passed  beyond  the  narrower  Jewish 
view  of  the  Gentile  Christians,  and  included  all 
followers  of  Christ  in  his  thought  as  he  wrote. 
The  fact  that  the  letter  knows  of  persecutions 
would  tend  to  fix  the  time  of  writing  about  the 
beginning  of  the  period  of  those  trying  expe- 
riences, which  would  lead  us  to  conclude  that  it 
was  not  written  earlier  than  the  year  65.  The 
reference  to  Babylon  in  v:  13  has  by  many  been 
deemed  metaphorical,   and   it  is   held   that  the 


The  Writings  of  James,  Peter  and  Jude  185 

apostle  meant  to  describe  Rome  by  the  term. 
It  is  a  matter  of  uncertainty,  and  not  important. 

When  we  turn  to  the  Second  Epistle  of  Peter, 
we  find  many  critics  convinced  that  it  is  not  the 
writing  of  the  apostle.  Eusebius  testifies :  **  One 
epistle  of  Peter,  which  is  called  the  First,  is  ac- 
cepted ;  and  this  the  presbyters  of  old  have  used 
in  their  writings  as  undoubted.  But  that  which 
is  circulated  as  his  Second  Epistle  we  have  re- 
ceived to  be  not  canonical.  Nevertheless,  as  it 
appeared  to  many  to  be  useful,  it  has  been  dili- 
gently read  with  the  other  Scriptures."  There 
are  no  direct  quotations  from  this  epistle  in  the 
Christian  writings  of  the  first  two  centuries. 
Yet  Clement  of  Rome,  writing  about  100,  seems 
to  refer  to  it  when  he  says :  "  Let  that  Scripture 
be  far  from  us  which  says.  These  things  we 
heard  in  the  time  of  our  fathers,  and  behold  we 
have  grown  old,  and  none  of  these  things  has 
happened  to  us."  The  reference  would  seem  to 
be  to  2  Pet.  iii :  4. 

After  the  time  of  Eusebius  the  epistle 
seems  to  have  been  generally  received.  Je- 
rome included  it  in  his  Latin  translation,  while 
seeming  somewhat  doubtful  about  it;  but  after 
his  time  it  was  generally  accepted,  and  found  its 
place  in  the  Canon  at  Laodicea.  The  following 
points  are  urged  against  its  genuineness :  ( i ) 
That  the  writer  labours  unnaturally  to  identify 
himself  with  the  apostle.     (2)  The  reference  to 


1 86    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

Paul  in  iii:  15-16  is  not  what  would  be  expected 
from  Peter.  (3)  There  are  striking  differences 
between  the  two  letters,  both  in  style  and 
thought.  (4)  The  relation  between  the  second 
chapter  and  the  Epistle  of  Jude  is  perplexing, 
and  suggests  doubts  as  to  the  apostolic  authority 
of  the  authors.  (5)  The  resemblance  between 
this  letter  and  certain  passages  in  Josephus  is  so 
close  as  to  show  that  the  writer  must  have  been 
acquainted  with  works  not  published  until  after 
Peter  was  dead. 

It  may  be  said  regarding  these  objections : 
That  had  the  writer  been  an  imitator,  he  would 
have  used  exactly  the  words  used  in  the  first 
epistle  instead  of  the  fuller  title  used  here.  A 
man  uses  his  own  name  with  freedom,  some- 
times writes  his  initials,  sometimes  the  full  name. 
The  writer  refers  to  this  as  his  "  second  epistle," 
asserts  that  he  was  a  witness  of  the  Transfigura- 
tion, and  refers  to  Christ's  conversation  recorded 
in  John  xxi :  18-19.  As  to  the  improbability  of 
his  endorsing  the  teachings  of  Paul,  we  may 
simply  ask — Why  not?  If,  as  was  suggested,  he 
was  writing  to  many  who  had  been  especially  in- 
fluenced by  Paul,  it  was  a  very  wise  thing  to  do. 
There  may  have  been  very  good  reasons  for  do- 
ing so,  which  are  not  known  to  us.  As  to  dif- 
ference of  style,  it  is  apparent.  There  are  more 
rare  words  than  in  the  first  epistle,  though  they 
abound  in  both.  The  second  letter  is  less  He- 
braistic and  better  Greek.    But  it  may  be  said  the 


The  Writings  of  James,  Peter  and  Jude  187 

second  letter  gives  evidence  of  being  more  hastily 
composed  than  the  first.  The  writer  had  heard 
of  the  false  teachers,  who  were  already  doing 
their  injurious  work  in  Asia  Minor.  Possibly 
the  letter  of  Jude  had  come  to  his  hand,  and 
fired  him  to  write  in  similar  strain,  embodying 
much  of  it  in  his  own  message.  This  is  certainly 
possible,  if  not  probable.  It  is  quite  probable 
that  Peter  came  to  be  more  proficient  in  Greek 
during  the  years  that  elapsed  between  his  first 
letter  and  this  one. 

But  while  there  are  differences,  there  are  many 
points  of  resemblance.     There  are  fifty-eight  un- 
common words  in  the  first  epistle  and  forty-eight 
in  the  second.     A  writer  attempting  to  imitate 
would  probably  have  used  many  of  these  words 
in  the  second  letter.     But  we  have  a  number  of 
words  and  phrases  here  which  are  found  in  the 
first  epistle  and  also  in  the  speeches  of  Peter 
recorded  in  the  Acts.     As  to  the  difference  in 
thought,  it  explains  something  of  the  difference 
in  style.    The  key-note  of  the  first  letter  is  hope, 
while  that  of  the  second  is  knowledge.    The  sup- 
posed knowledge  of  Josephus,  urged  by  some,  is 
based  on  the  appearance  of  a  few  words  in  Second 
Peter  which  are  found  in  Josephus.     But  some 
of  these  same  w^ords  are  in  First  Peter  and  in 
some  of  the  writings  of  Paul,  indicating  that  they 
were  in  common  use  before  Josephus,     It  must 
further  be  emphasized  that  if  this  had  been  a  sec- 
ond-century writing  it  would  probably  have  given 


l88    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

more  evidence  of  knowledge  of  the  heresies  of 
that  time.  After  all  has  been  said,  there  remains 
in  this  epistle  a  beauty  and  power  found  in  no 
writing  of  the  second  century.  Those  writings 
are  valuable,  but  here  there  is  that  indescribable 
touch  of  inspiration  which  breathes  the  presence 
and  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit  not  felt  in  the  writ- 
ings not  contained  in  the  sacred  Canon. 

The  Epistle  of  Jude,  as  already  noted,  is  much 
like  the  second  chapter  of  Second  Peter.  We 
have  already  indicated  that  it  was  older  in  its 
composition.  Jude's  epistle  is  the  more  original, 
while  Peter*s  use  of  the  material  suggests  the 
quotation  of  the  stronger  statement  of  Jude. 
This  epistle  is  the  most  unique  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment. Hebrew  phrases  and  idioms  betray  the 
Jewish  standpoint  of  the  writer.  It  combines 
features  of  Old  Testament  prophecy  with  those 
of  Jewish  apocalyptic  literature.  It  contains 
items  unlike  anything  else  in  the  Canon.  Its 
style  is  bold  and  picturesque,  broken  and  rugged. 
The  titles  of  the  book  are  very  different  in  dif- 
ferent manuscripts.  The  writer  of  the  epistle 
nowhere  calls  himself  an  apostle,  or  hints  at 
such  a  thing.  He  rather  indicates  that  he  is  not 
in  verse  17,  where  he  refers  to  "  the  words 
which  have  been  spoken  before  by  the  apostles  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  We  may  leave  the  ques- 
tions of  authorship,  date  and  place,  unsettled. 
The  important  fact  is  that  the  early  church  ac- 
cepted the  writing  as  that  of  a  man  who  was  in 


The  Writings  of  James,  Peter  and  Jude  189 

such  touch  with  the  apostolic  life  and  spirit  as 
to  be  stirred  to  a  flame  of  impetuous  denunciation 
of  contumacious  professors  of  the  faith,  and  an 
earnest  appeal  to  the  followers  of  Christ  to  be 
faithful  to  their  Lord. 


XXIV 

THE  WRITINGS  OF  PAUL 

THE  dominant  factor  in  the  Apostolic 
Church  was  the  great  apostle  to  the 
Gentiles.  We  have  spoken  of  the  con- 
version and  influence  of  Paul  in  the  chapter  on 
the  Acts.  It  would  be  fascinating  to  study  his 
life  work  in  detail,  but  our  task  has  to  do  with 
the  critical  discussions  which  have  arisen  regard- 
ing his  New  Testament  epistles.  We  shall  con- 
sider them  briefly  in  the  probable  order  of  their 
composition. 

The  First  Epistle  to  The  Thessalonians  is 
generally  accepted  as  the  first  letter  from  Paul's 
pen  of  which  we  know.  It  is  one  of  the  writings 
whose  genuineness  has  been  almost  universally 
acknowledged.  The  character  of  Paul  has  left 
its  distinct  impress  here.  Prof.  Jowett  says :  "  It 
has  been  objected  against  the  genuineness  of  this 
epistle  that  it  contains  only  a  single  statement  of 
doctrine.  But  liveliness,  personality,  similar 
traits  of  disposition,  are  more  difficult  to  invent 
than  statements  of  doctrine."  There  are,  more- 
over, several  statements  of  doctrine,  such  as  the 
supreme  dignity  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the 
deliverance  from  wrath  effected  by  Him,  the 
190 


The  Writings  of  Paul  19I 

resurrection  of  the  just,  and  especially  the  second 
coming  of  Christ. 

But  it  is  evident  that  Paul  did  not  pur- 
pose to  elaborate  a  statement  of  doctrines  in 
this  letter.  It  was  written  for  a  specific, 
rather  than  a  general  purpose.  The  reports 
brought  to  him  from  Thessalonica  led  him  to 
write  to  strengthen  the  brethren  in  persecution, 
and  to  warn  them  against  unworthy  views  and 
practices  indulged  in  because  they  had  an  idea 
that  Christ  would  return  very  soon.  The  letter 
was  written  from  Corinth  about  52.  The  state- 
ment appended  in  the  usual  editions  that  it  was 
written  from  Athens  is  incorrect.  Acts  xviii :  i- 
5  show  that  it  was  at  Corinth,  after  he  had  left 
Athens,  for  it  was  after  Silas  and  Timothy  had 
joined  him. 

The  Second  Epistle  to  The  Thessalonians  soon 
followed  the  first,  probably  in  the  same  year,  or 
the  next.  It  seemed  necessary  to  warn  his  fel- 
low-Christians against  the  idea  that  the  second 
coming  of  the  Lord  was  near  at  hand.  Possibly 
Paul  had  the  usual  misconception  on  this  sub- 
ject at  first ;  but  he  soon  saw  that  the  expectation 
was  not  to  be  unduly  cherished,  hence  this  second 
letter  emphasized  the  warning  against  any  false 
hopes  regarding  it.  The  second  epistle  has  even 
stronger  Pauline  characteristics  than  the  first. 
The  description  of  the  Man  of  sin  led  it  to  be 
much  quoted  by  the  early  fathers.  There  has 
been  much  discussion  of  the  second  chapter,  and 


192    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

an  attempt  to  show  that  it  is  unlike  Paul.  But 
D^an  Alford  insists  that  it  "  will  be  found  on 
comparison  to  bear,  in  style  and  flow  of  sen- 
tences, a  close  resemblance  to  the  denunciatory 
and  prophetic  portions  of  the  other  epistles."  It 
is  suggestive  that  in  Paul's  later  epistles,  and 
those  most  fully  elaborated,  as  Romans,  he  has 
very  little  to  say  about  the  second  advent.  Its 
importance  as  to  time  had  taken  a  secondary 
place  in  his  appreciation  of  truth. 

The  Epistle  to  The  Galatians  is  one  of  four 
whose  Pauline  authorship  has  been  practically 
undisputed  in  the  realm  of  scholarship.  The 
others  are  the  two  letters  to  the  Corinthians  and 
that  to  the  Romans.  It  is  generally  believed  that 
this  letter  was  written  at  Ephesus.  A  mischiev- 
ous movement  had  developed  in  the  Galatian 
Church  which  had  loosened  their  hold  upon  the 
fundamental  truth  that  faith  in  Christ  is  the  only 
and  sufficient  ground  for  justification  before 
God,  so  that  they  were  casting  about  for  other 
supplementary  means  of  obtaining  justification. 
And  these  means  were  certain  observances  of 
parts  of  the  ceremonial  law.  Paul  combats  this 
error  holding  up  Christ  as  the  all-sufficient 
Saviour,  and  refers  to  the  misguided  conduct  of 
Peter  at  Antioch  to  emphasize  his  point.  It 
would  seem  the  Judaic  tendency  had  been  fos- 
tered by  some  who  were  opposed  to  Paul  and 
who  threw  suspicion  upon  his  apostolic  authority, 
for  he  insists  upon  his  place  as  an  apostle  with 


The  Writings  of  Paul  193 

persistent  demand.  The  cast  of  thought  and 
language  in  the  epistle  has  a  strong  affinity  to 
that  in  the  letters  to  the  Corinthians  and  Romans, 
which  we  shall  proceed  to  consider. 

The  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  was  prob- 
ably written  soon  after  that  to  the  Galatians. 
Paul  had  intended  to  sail  from  Ephesus  to 
Corinth,  thence  to  visit  Macedonia,  returning  to 
Corinth  on  his  way  to  Jerusalem.  The  news 
from  Corinth  changed  his  plan.  He  had  written 
them  a  letter,  now  lost,  and  had  told  them  of  this 
plan,  and  when  he  changed  it,  they  accused  him 
of  insincerity  (2  Cor.  \:iy).  But  the  change 
was  due  to  the  reports. 

Aside  from  the  unchristian  conduct  of  the 
disciples,  there  were  some  serious  perplexi- 
ties among  them,  such  as  questions  of  mar- 
riage and  celibacy,  of  eating  meats  offered 
to  idols,  of  the  appearance  of  women  in  the 
churches,  of  the  value  of  spiritual  gifts,  and 
material  difficulties  about  the  resurrection.  They 
had  written  Paul  about  these  matters,  but  had 
said  practically  nothing  about  the  unholy  living 
of  certain  among  them.  Paul  deals  with  all  the 
conditions  in  his  most  vigorous  spirit,  revealing 
a  splendid  self  control,  and  rising  at  times  to 
sublime  heights  as  in  the  thirteenth  and  fifteenth 
chapters,  as  he  pictures  the  spirit  of  divine  love 
and  treats  of  the  victory  of  the  resurrection. 

The  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  is  a 
sequel  to  the  first.       He  had  hurried  to  Mace- 


194    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

donia,  apparently  being  compelled  to  flee  from 
Ephesus,  and  amid  great  hardships  had  reached 
Philippi,  where  he  met  Titus,  whose  good  tidings 
filled  Paul  with  joy.  In  this  epistle  the  great 
apostle  opens  his  inmost  heart  as  nowhere  else. 
The  joy  felt  at  first  was  soon  changed  to  sor- 
row as  Titus  reported  the  aspersions  cast  upon 
Paul  by  some  of  the  Corinthians.  It  almost 
breaks  his  heart,  and  he  pours  out  his  soul  in 
protest  and  in  defense  of  his  loyalty  to  them  and 
to  his  Lord.  In  this  we  find  its  striking  contrast 
to  the  first  epistle  explained.  That  epistle  is 
most  systematic  in  its  progress  of  thought,  while 
this  is  perhaps  the  least  systematic  of  all  Paul's 
letters.  It  is  the  most  emotional.  Yet  he  weaves 
consolation  with  tribulation  in  a  way  to  bring  im- 
mense comfort  to  the  struggling  heart  and  the 
afflicted  Church  of  all  time. 

At  the  end  of  the  ninth  chapter  the  tone  of  the 
letter  changes  so  suddenly,  from  tenderness  to  a 
spirit  of  indignation,  that  it  is  most  startling. 
Some  have  felt  it  must  be  a  separate  letter  thus 
added.  But  it  would  appear  probable,  as  one 
reads,  that  as  Paul  wrote,  Titus  continued  his 
reports,  and  these  reports  caused  the  changes  of 
feeling  in  the  apostle's  mind.  Such  sudden 
changes  of  style  are  found  elsewhere,  as  in  the 
speech  of  Elijah  at  Carmel.  It  is  all,  however, 
recognized  as  the  letter  of  Paul. 

The  Epistle  to  The  Romans  is  the  fourth  of 
this  group.     Its  authenticity  is  undisputed,  ex- 


The  Writings  of  Paul  195 

cept  that  Bauer  questions  the  last  two  chapters 
as  being  from  Paul.  Dr.  McGiffert  holds  that 
the  epistle  naturally  ends  with  the  fifteenth 
chapter,  and  that  the  sixteenth  was  probably 
added  at  a  later  time.  He  considers  it  Pauline, 
but  probably  a  part  of  a  letter  to  the  Ephesians. 
Of  these  points  we  will  speak  in  a  moment.  The 
epistle  is  generally  recognized  as  having  been 
written  from  Corinth  about  the  year  58.  Ref- 
erences in  the  Acts  and  other  epistles  furnish  the 
data  for  this  conclusion.  Paul  had  long  been  in- 
tending to  visit  Rome,  and  prepared  this  long  and 
carefully  elaborated  letter  to  open  the  way  for 
his  coming. 

The  character  of  the  letter  is  probably  ex- 
plained by  certain  facts  regarding  the  Church 
at  Rome.  It  had  not  been  founded  by  Paul, 
and  the  data  are  insufficient  to  justify  a 
conclusion  regarding  its  beginning.  Much  dis- 
cussion has  been  had  as  to  whether  it  was  mainly 
a  Jewish  or  a  Gentile  church.  Paul's  letter  would 
seem  to  indicate  the  latter,  judging  from  the  dis- 
cussion of  chapters  ix-xi.  Probably  there  were 
Jewish  converts  among  them,  and  we  note  that 
Paul  followed  his  custom  when  he  arrived  at 
Rome  of  going  to  the  chief  among  the  Jews  first. 
Enough  had  been  known  of  Christianity  in  Rome 
to  allow  Paul  to  base  his  argument  on  a  founda- 
tion of  Jewish  thought  and  history,  but  much  of 
the  letter  is  intended  to  reveal  the  point  of  view 
of  the  whole  human  race.    The  tone  of  the  letter 


196    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

is  not  especially  polemical,  and  does  not  seem  to 
have  been  directed  against  any  false  doctrine,  or 
any  special  condition  in  Rome.  It  seems  to  be 
a  careful  statement  of  the  writer's  view  of  the 
general  truth  regarding  the  meaning  of  the  Gos- 
pel in  its  relations  to  the  Law,  to  prophecy,  and 
to  the  universal  needs  of  mankind.  Chapters 
ix-xi  do  not  seem  to  discuss  the  Jews  in  a  con- 
troversial spirit,  but  to  relate  this  feature  of  his 
subject  to  the  whole  in  its  proper  light.  Perhaps 
the  thought  that  at  the  world's  metropolis  a 
somewhat  full  and  elaborate  statement  of  the 
fundamental  truths  of  Christianity  would  be  de- 
sirable had  prompted  the  letter. 

As  to  the  discussion  regarding  the  last  two 
chapters,  it  may  be  said  that  early  copies  of  the 
epistle  existed  without  them.  Origen  attributes 
the  omission  to  Marcion,  who  for  his  own  pur- 
poses mutilated  the  epistle.  The  fact  that  the 
fathers  do  not  quote  from  chapters  xv  and  xvi 
is  readily  explained  by  the  ending  of  the  apostle's 
argument  with  the  fourteenth  chapter.  The  sal- 
utations and  practical  suggestions  contained  in 
these  chapters  would  not  be  so  likely  to  have 
place  in  the  discussions  of  the  patristic  time.  It 
is  true,  as  Dr.  McGiffert  says,  that  the  fifteenth 
chapter  has  a  natural  ending ;  but  Paul's  frequent 
postscripts  are  most  characteristic,  and  the  real 
doxology  at  the  end  of  the  sixteenth  chapter  fills 
out  the  letter  as  no  other  ending  does.  Dr.  Mc- 
Giffert argues  that  the  extraordinary  number  of 


The  Writings  of  Paul  197 

personal  greetings  is  scarcely  consistent  with  the 
fact  that  Paul  had  never  been  in  Rome,  and  the 
argument  has  force;  and  yet  it  is  by  no  means 
impossible  that  these  friends  whom  Paul  knew 
in  various  places  had  settled  in  the  capital  city. 
It  may  be  that  some  fragment  of  another  letter 
has  been  interpolated  here,  bearing  the  marks 
of  Paul  in  its  contents,  but  the  subject  can  only 
be  one  of  conjecture,  and  has  no  vital  importance 
in  its  bearing  upon  the  value  of  the  epistle  as 
the  great  apostle's  doctrinal  statement  of  the  re- 
ligion of  Jesus  Christ. 

Passing  thus  rapidly  from  the  accepted  epistles 
of  Paul,  we  turn  to  consider  a  group  of  four 
letters  which  are  generally  assigned  to  the  time 
of  the  apostle's  first  stay  in  Rome.  They  are  the 
letters  to  the  Colossians,  Philippians,  Ephesians 
and  Philemon.  Probably  the  first  of  these  was 
The  Epistle  to  The  Colossians.  With  it  must  be 
associated  the  brief  Letter  to  Philemon,  which 
was  written  at  the  same  time.  The  Church  at 
Colossae  was  meeting  in  the  house  of  Philemon 
at  the  time,  and  the  general  and  personal  letters 
reveal  traces  of  related  thought.  It  would  seem 
probable  that  Philemon  had  visited  Ephesus 
when  Paul  resided  there,  and  had  become  a 
Christian.  The  Christian  worker  who  had 
laboured  at  Colossae  was  Epaphrus,  who  had 
visited  Paul  at  Rome,  and  was  the  bearer  of 
news  concerning  the  Colossian  and  Ephesian 
churches. 


198    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

There  are  those  who  urge  that  these  letters 
were  written  at  Csesarea,  but  we  need  not 
take  time  to  dwell  upon  the  subject,  as  the  gen- 
erally accepted  opinion  fixes  the  place  as  Rome. 
Onesimus,  the  runaway  slave  of  Philemon,  had 
come  under  Paul's  influence  and  confessed  Christ. 
Paul  sent  him  back  to  Philemon  with  a  personal 
note,  in  which  a  beautiful  Gospel  of  emancipation 
is  set  forth  to  all  succeeding  generations.  Paul 
pleads  for  Onesimus  as  being  no  longer  a  mere 
slave,  but  now  a  *'  brother  beloved  "  in  Christ. 
The  general  epistle  to  the  Colossians  is  coloured 
with  the  thought  arising  from  this  incident. 
Their  spiritual  deliverance  from  the  slavery  of 
sin,  their  reconciliation  with  God  who  "  were 
sometime  alienated  and  enemies  in  your  mind," 
and  the  fact  that  in  Christ  there  "  is  neither 
Greek  nor  Jew,  barbarian,  Scythian,  bond  nor 
free,"  all  take  on  meaning  as  the  apostle  urges 
them  to  "  be  forgiving,  long-suffering,  even  as 
Christ  forgave "  them.  At  last  he  mentions 
Tychicus  "  with  Onesimus,  a  faithful  and  be- 
loved brother  who  was  one  of  you."  The  per- 
sonal letter  to  Philemon  is  the  only  specimen  of 
Paul's  private  correspondence  preserved  to  us. 

The  Epistle  to  The  Colossians  has  given  rise 
to  much  discussion,  because  of  the  "  Colossian 
heresy  "  presented  by  the  "  false  teachers  "  who 
had  come  among  them.  There  are  wide  differ- 
ences of  opinion  as  to  what  this  heresy  was.  It 
would  seem  to  have  been  a  sort  of  philosophy. 


The  Writings  of  Paul  199 

Judaistic  in  some  of  its  features,  involving  the 
worship  of  angels,  inculcating  ascetic  rules,  in- 
spired by  a  false  idea  about  the  sinfulness  of  the 
flesh,  and,  most  serious  of  all,  limiting  the  recog- 
nition of  Christ's  authority  and  the  sufficiency  of 
His  redemption.  We  need  not  trace  at  this  time 
the  sources  of  this  heresy.  Suffice  it  to  say  that 
it  does  not  seem  to  have  secured  a  great  hold  upon 
the  Colossians  for  Paul  does  not  appeal  to  them 
to  return  to  their  faith,  but  to  hold  fast  to  it  in 
view  of  this  dangerous  teaching.  By  pointing 
out  its  errors  he  hopes  to  keep  them  from  yielding 
to  its  power. 

Speaking  of  the  authenticity  of  the  epistle, 
Dr.  McGiffert,  says :  "  The  argument  against 
its  genuineness  drawn  from  its  language  and 
style,  has  no  weight.  While  there  are  un- 
doubtedly linguistic  and  stylistic  peculiarities  in 
the  epistle,  the  most  noticeable  of  them  can  be 
explained  from  the  subject-matter,  and  from  the 
polemic  use  by  Paul  of  the  terminology  of  those 
whose  teachings  he  is  refuting ;  and  the  marks  of 
identity  with  his  acknowledged  works,  especially 
with  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians,  which  was 
written  at  about  the  same  time,  are  far  more 
numerous  and  striking.  But  the  Christology  of 
the  epistle  has  long  been  a  stumbling-block  and 
has  led  many  scholars  to  deny  that  Paul  can  be 
its  author.  But  when  the  purpose  of  the  epistle 
is  kept  clearly  in  mind,  when  it  is  realized  that 
the  author's  object  was  not  to  teach  Christology, 


aoo   Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

but  to  emphasize  the  completeness  of  Christ's  re- 
demptive work,  in  order  to  show  the  groundless- 
ness of  the  observances  and  practices  recom- 
mended in  Colossse  (by  the  false  teachers),  the 
difficulties  vanish.  Thus  the  striking  assertion 
that  in  Christ  dwells  all  the  fulness  of  the  God- 
head bodily,  which  goes  beyond  numerous  utter- 
ances in  Paul's  writings  only  in  form  and  empha- 
sis, finds  its  explanation,  as  the  context  shows,  in 
his  desire  to  bring  out  the  fact  that  the  man  who 
is  in  Christ  has  full  redemption  and  does  not  need 
to  seek  fulness  and  perfectness  in  ritual  observ- 
ance and  ascetic  practice."  It  is  not  conceivable 
that  anyone  else  could  have  imitated  Paul  so 
perfectly  as  this  letter  does.  Its  external  and  in- 
ternal evidence  is  overwhelming  in  favour  of  the 
accepted  view  that  it  is  from  his  pen. 

The  Epistle  to  The  Ephesians  is  supposed  to 
have  been  written  probably  immediately  after  that 
to  the  Colossians,  as  there  is  much  resemblance 
between  them.  Dr.  McGififert  says :  *'  Some 
who  ascribe  Colossians  to  Paul  are  unable  to  ad- 
mit that  he  wrote  Ephesians.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  the  difficulties  which  beset  the  latter 
are  greater  than  those  which  attach  to  the  former, 
and  that  the  marks  of  Paul's  own  hand  are  fewer 
and  less  distinct.  But  when  the  authenticity  of 
the  one  has  been  admitted,  the  principal  argu- 
ments against  the  genuineness  of  the  other  are 
deprived  of  their  force.     .     .     .     Moreover,  the 


The  Writings  of  Paul  201 

resemblances  between  Colossians  and  Ephesians, 
both  in  style  and  in  matter,  are  much  easier  to 
explain  on  the  assumption  that  they  were  written 
by  the  same  man  at  about  the  same  time,  than  on 
the  assumption  that  the  author  of  the  latter 
copied  from  the  former.  Many  of  the  ideas, 
words  and  phrases  are  the  same  in  both,  but  there 
is  nowhere  a  trace  of  slavish  or  mechanical  repro- 
duction." 

The  objections  may  be  summarized  briefly 
thus :  ( I )  Paul  would  not  be  likely  to  re- 
peat himself  so  fully  as  Ephesians  repeats  Co- 
lossians. (2)  Such  expressions  as  "  after  I 
heard  of  your  faith"  in  i,  15,  indicate  that  the 
writer  had  never  been  in  Ephesus.  (3)  There 
are  no  salutations  to  the  Church  at  Ephesus,  as 
we  would  certainly  expect  of  Paul.  (4)  The 
Ephesian  church  contained  both  Jews  and  Gen- 
tiles, but  this  letter  is  apparently  to  Gentiles  only. 
(5)  Many  items  in  style,  sentiment  and  aim  are 
not  Pauline.  To  all  this  it  may  be  said  the  ob- 
jectors create  more  difficulties  than  they  solve  by 
their  theory,  that  any  one  else  than  Paul  was  the 
author  of  the  letter.  The  claim  of  De  Wette  that 
the  author  passed  it  oflF  as  Pauline  proves  that  it 
cannot  contain  anything  plainly  un-Pauline. 
While  there  is  much  in  common  wnth  Colossians, 
there  is  more  distinctive  in  Ephesians  itself.  As 
to  the  expression  about  his  "  hearing  "  of  them, 
the  same  is  used  in  Philemon,  and  simply  goes 


ao2    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

back  in  thought  to  the  time  when  Paul  had  not 
yet  known  them,  or  refers  to  the  reports  recently 
received. 

We  would  expect  the  salutations  ordinarily, 
yet  they  do  not  always  occur  in  the  way  of 
personal  greetings.  Since  the  Jews  in  Ephesus 
opposed  Paul,  it  is  not  strange  that  he  wrote  more 
especially  to  the  Gentiles.  Moreover  there  are 
those  who  think  the  letter  was  a  general  letter  to 
the  churches  in  the  region  of  Ephesus,  and  not 
to  that  one  church.  The  people  in  the  region  were 
preponderatingly  Gentile.  The  main  argument  is 
regarding  the  doctrine.  In  answer  to  this  Dr. 
McGiffert  says :  **  Here  again,  as  in  Colossians, 
the  advance  upon  Paul's  other  writings  is  almost 
wholly  in  the  matter  of  emphasis,  and  when  the 
practical  purpose  of  the  epistle  is  taken  into  ac- 
count, the  difference  makes  no  insuperable  diffi- 
culty." Paul's  design  in  this  letter  is  a  general 
one — to  confirm  and  inspire  the  churches.  The 
atmosphere  of  the  letter  is  serene  and  hopeful. 
The  appeal  is  to  strive  for  a  realization  of  the  very 
highest  Christian  character  in  the  fulness  of 
Christ. 

The  Epistle  to  The  Philippians  is  the  last  of 
this  group.  It  is  placed  by  some  before,  by  others 
after  the  three  just  considered.  Bishop  Light- 
foot,  to  whom  the  students  of  these  epistles  is 
greatly  indebted,  places  this  letter  very  early  in 
the  first  Roman  imprisonment.  He  points  out 
several  resemblances  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans, 


The  Writings  of  Paul  203 

and  argues  that  these  indicate  an  early  date.  On 
the  other  hand  a  rather  striking  resemblance  be- 
tween Phil,  i,  23-30,  and  2  Tim.  iv,  6-8,  indicate 
a  date  as  late  as  possible  for  this  letter.  It  is  a 
matter  which  cannot  be  settled,  and  not  of  great 
importance.  There  is  practically  no  serious  ob- 
jection to  the  authenticity  of  the  epistle.  It  is  a 
personal  letter  of  a  friend  to  Christian  friends. 
They  have  given  Paul  much  joy.  There  is  one 
bad  tendency  in  their  midst  which  he  rebukes, 
namely  an  indication  of  disunion.  He  implores 
them  to  be  of  one  mind,  and  presents  the  familiar 
doctrines,  inspiring  appeals,  and  practical  lessons 
in  a  most  loving  spirit. 

The  Pastoral  Epistles  to  Timothy  and  Titus 
complete  the  letters  of  Paul.  Their  authenticity 
has  been  widely  questioned.  Eusebius  brings 
very  important  testimony  when  he  speaks  of  "  the 
fourteen  epistles  of  Paul,"  although  he  makes 
some  reservation  about  the  epistle  to  the  He- 
brews. Dr.  McGiffert  thinks,  "  there  is  grave 
reason  to  doubt  whether  they  are  actually  Paul's." 
He  notes  that  they  are  not  included  in  the  writ- 
ings of  Paul  by  any  writer  prior  to  Irenseus. 
They  are  the  only  letters  bearing  the  name  of 
Paul  not  appearing  in  the  New  Testament  of 
Marcion.  The  tone  employed  in  addressing 
Timothy  and  Titus  is  not  what  he  would  expect 
of  Paul.  "  They  had  been  for  many  years  be- 
loved and  trusted  disciples  and  intimate  friends 
and  companions,  and  yet  Paul  finds  it  necessary 


204    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

to  emphasize  his  apostleship,  to  defend  his  char- 
acter and  authority,  to  assert  that  he  is  not  lying, 
as  if  he  were  addressing  strangers  or  even  ene- 
mies such  as  he  had  to  deal  with  in  Galatia  and 
Corinth."  It  is  further  urged  that  the  contents 
have  many  instructions  in  the  elementary  duties 
.of  the  Christian  life,  warnings  against  vice  and 
lust,  as  if  the  writer  thought  Timothy  and  Titus 
needed  these. 

Moreover  it  is  claimed  that  while  there 
are  resemblances  to  Paul's  epistles,  there  are 
so  many  features  not  repeated  in  Paul  as  to 
suggest  another  writer.  One  table  shows  one 
hundred  and  sixty-five  words  found  only  in  these 
three  epistles.  Dr.  McGiffert  further  says : 
"  Though  we  cannot,  with  many  critics,  draw  a 
conclusion  adverse  to  Pauline  authorship  from 
the  existence  of  such  heresies  as  we  find  alluded 
to,  we  are  compelled  to  see  in  the  way  they  are 
handled  by  the  author  a  convincing  proof  that  he 
was  not  Paul.  .  .  .  Whether  the  false  teachers 
are  antinomian  or  ascetic,  whether  they  are  spirit- 
ualistic or  legalistic,  the  author  does  not  treat 
them  as  if  there  were  any  vital  difference  between 
them.  They  are  all  alike  given  to  foolish  and 
ignorant  questionings,  disputes  about  words, 
strifes  about  the  law,  fables,  genealogies,  and 
profane  babblings.  Such  indiscriminate  denuncia- 
tions are  certainly  not  what  we  should  expect 
from  a  man  like  Paul,  who  was  an  uncommonly 
clear-headed    dialectician,    accustomed    to    draw 


The  Writings  of  Paul  aoj 

fine  distinctions,  and  whose  penetration  and  abil- 
ity to  discover  and  display  the  vital  point  of  dif- 
ference between  himself  and  an  antagonist  have 
never  been  surpassed. 

"  Those  who  ascribe  to  Paul  the  references 
to  false  teachmg  which  occur  in  the  pastoral 
epistles  do  him  a  serious  injustice.  .  .  .  In- 
stead of  demonstrating  the  falseness  of  the 
positions  taken  by  the  heretical  teachers,  he  sim- 
ply denounces  them ;  and  instead  of  exhibiting  his 
own  Gospel,  and  showing  its  bearing  on  the  ques- 
tions in  dispute,  he  simply  appeals  to  the  fact  that 
a  deposit  of  faith  has  been  handed  down  as  a 
safeguard  against  all  heresies  of  whatever  sort. 
The  contrast  between  this  kind  of  procedure  and 
that  which  Paul  follows  in  Galatians,  Romans, 
and  Colossians,  in  all  the  epistles,  in  fact,  in  which 
he  has  to  deal  with  heresy,  is  most  striking.  The 
spirit  that  actuates  the  pastorals  is  not  the  spirit 
of  Paul,  but  the  spirit  of  2  John,  and  of  Poly- 
carp."  This  is  trenchant  and  vigorous  argu- 
ment. 

On  the  other  hand  the  arguments  are  given  for 
the  Pauline  authorship.  The  Muratorian  Canon 
(about  170)  includes  thirteen  epistles  of  Paul,  ex- 
cluding Hebrews,  and  they  have  held  their  place 
in  all  the  Canons  East  and  West.  Prior  to 
Irenseus,  both  Clement  of  Rome  and  Polycarp 
use  expressions  which  are  identical  with  certain 
phrases  in  Titus,  and  2  Timothy.  On  the  face  of 
them  the  letters  claim  to  be  Paul's.    One  who  was 


2o6    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

attempting  to  imitate  Paul  would  not  have  been 
so  free  to  use  words  and  phrases  so  original  as 
many  which  occur.  The  very  fact  which  Dr. 
McGiffert  urges  so  earnestly,  that  Paul  does  not 
reveal  his  usual  argumentative  and  logical  acu- 
men here,  is  in  perfect  harmony  with  a  letter  to 
one  who  was  his  "  own  son  in  faith."  Paul's 
references  to  himself  bear  all  the  naturalness  of 
a  personal  testimony.  The  whole  atmosphere  of 
the  letters  is  saturated  with  a  Pauline  flavour, 
not  the  keen  analytical  method  of  the  longer 
epistles,  written  to  combat  error,  but  in  harmony 
with  a  general  treatise. 

As  the  reader  follows  the  thought,  it  be- 
comes apparent  that  what  Dr.  McGiffert 
deems  a  lack  of  confidence  in  his  companions 
in  the  faith,  leading  him  to  warnings  against 
vices  not  likely  to  be  dangerous  to  them,  is 
only  a  high  aspiration  for  them  that  they  may 
be  free  from  all  these  things,  to  which  all  men 
are  liable,  and  to  which  men  of  that  day  and  en- 
vironment were  continually  exposed.  Long  lists 
of  resemblances  between  the  expressions  in  these 
epistles  and  others  accepted  as  Paul's  are  given. 
Dr.  McGiffert  would  class  these  letters  with  the 
writings  of  Polycarp,  but  the  difference  of  tone, 
of  divine  glow,  of  intellectual  power,  is  immense. 
Dr.  P.  J.  Gloag  says :  "  The  combination  of 
mental  vigour  and  sober,  practical  good  sense, 
and  sagacious  intuition  with  regard  to  men  and 
things,   and   extensive  knowledge,   with   fervent 


The  Writings  of  Paul  207 

zeal,  and  enthusiasm  of  temperament,  and  ardent 
piety,  and  entire  self-sacrifice,  and  heavenly- 
mindedness,  and  the  upward,  onward  movement 
of  the  whole  inner  man  under  the  guidance  of 
God's  Holy  Spirit,  producing  an  inartistic  elo- 
quence of  immense  force  and  persuasiveness,  is 
found  in  these  pastoral  epistles,  as  in  all  the  other 
epistles  of  the  great  apostle;  but  it  is  found  no- 
where else.  St.  Paul,  we  know,  could  have 
written  them,  we  know  of  no  one  else  who 
could." 


XXV 

THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE  HEBREWS 

THE  importance  of  this  portion  of  the  New 
Testament  has  not  been  adequately  em- 
phasized. For  several  reasons  it  holds  a 
place  of  unique  character  among  the  epistles 
which  came  from  the  apostles.  Its  distinctive 
significance  lies  in  the  fact  that  it  comes  from 
the  second  generation  of  the  apostolic  age,  in  the 
last  quarter  of  the  first  century,  and  while  that 
may  be  true  of  John's  Gospel,  yet  this  writer  does 
not  carry  the  personal  memory  which  appears  in 
John,  and  reflects  for  us  the  real  balance  of  the 
truth  as  it  came  to  be  understood  by  the  Church 
which  followed  the  earlier  beginnings.  The  dif- 
ferent points  of  view  and  of  emphasis,  as  sug- 
gested in  different  epistles  and  records,  were  com- 
ing to  be  related  in  their  proper  proportions,  and 
we  have  here  a  statement  of  the  whole  truth,  both 
as  it  related  the  Old  Testament  with  the  New, 
and  the  life  and  teachings  of  Christ  with  the  illu- 
mination of  the  teachings  of  the  apostles. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  does  this  for  us  as 

does  no  other  section  of  the  New  Testament.  The 

title  which  appears  in  our  versions,  including  both 

the  name  of  Paul  and  the  words  "  To  the  He- 

208 


The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews        209 

brews  "  is  not  found  in  the  early  manuscripts. 
The  words  "To  the  Hebrews"  are  generally 
found,  and  yet  the  epistle  itself  does  not  specify 
any  such  class,  nor  give  any  hint  of  the  writer. 
In  iii :  i,  the  writer  addresses  his  readers  as  "  holy 
brethren,  partakers  of  the  heavenly  calling,"  and 
there  is  really  no  specific  intimation  that  he  has 
in  mind  a  special  class  of  Christians.  The  whole 
scope  of  the  thought  suggests  a  much  broader 
purpose. 

It  was  a  time  of  persecution.  His  readers  are 
reminded  of  "  the  former  days,"  when  they  were 
first  "illuminated,"  and  of  persecution  endured 
in  the  past.  Sufficient  time  had  elapsed  to  allow 
them  to  show  signs  of  wavering  from  their  early 
steadfastness,  and  their  "leaders"  who  had 
"  spoken  to  them  the  word  of  God,"  had  already 
passed  away,  the  reference  to  them  (xiii :  7)  sug- 
gesting martyrdom  as  the  form  of  their  death. 
Nothing  can  be  urged  as  to  date  because  no  refer- 
ence is  made  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  for 
it  is  a  very  interesting  fact  that  no  mention  at  all 
is  made  of  the  Temple.  It  is  the  Tabernacle  to 
which  the  writer  refers  throughout  in  all  his  com- 
parisons and  contrasts.  It  is  the  camp  in  the 
wilderness  and  Moses,  the  giver  of  the  law,  with 
which  he  deals.  The  letter  is  written  to  a  cer- 
tain church  or  community  of  churches,  as  evi- 
denced in  xiii :  22-23 ;  but  we  have  no  data  to  in- 
dicate who  they  were.  The  expression  "  they  of 
Italy  "  may  mean  that  the  letter  was  written  from 


liO   Bible  Criticism  and  tke  Average  Man 

Italy,  or  that  some  from  Italy  were  sojourning 
with  the  writer  at  the  time.  Probably  the  letter 
was  written  about  the  year  80. 

Various  theories  about  the  authorship  have 
been  urged.  The  earliest  allusion  to  this 
matter  is  by  Clement  of  Alexandria,  who 
sets  forth  the  opinion  that  Paul  wrote  it 
first  in  Hebrew,  and  Luke  translated  it  into 
Greek.  But  it  is  very  evident  that  the  whole  letter 
has  the  unmistakable  ring  of  an  original  composi- 
tion, and  this  view  of  Clement  is  untenable.  An- 
other view,  apparently  held  by  Jerome,  was  that 
Paul  supplied  the  ideas  which  another  person  put 
into  their  present  form.  Tertullian  puts  forth  the 
suggestion  that  Barnabas  wrote  it.  All  this 
shows  that  the  early  fathers  realized  that  the 
epistle  bears  indications  that  it  did  not  come  from 
the  pen  of  Paul.  And  yet  it  has  similarities  to 
Paul's  thought  and  style,  and  soon  came  to  be 
attributed  to  him,  until  modern  scholarship  real- 
ized that  the  evidence  is  conclusive  against  Paul- 
ine authorship.  Luther  suggested  Apollos  as 
being  the  probable  author. 

The  fact  remains  that  we  do  not  know  the  au- 
thor. Concerning  this  Dr.  McGiffert  says : — 
"  Though  religiously  and  in  vigour  and  force  of 
personality,  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  He- 
brews was  inferior  to  the  great  apostle  to  the 
Gentiles,  he  was  without  doubt  the  finest  and 
most  cultured  literary  genius  of  the  primitive 
church.     His  thought  moves  throughout  on  an 


The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews        211 

elevated  plane,  and  his  language  is  uniformly 
worthy  of  his  thought,  in  certain  passages  becom- 
ing genuinely  eloquent  and  even  sublime.  The 
fact  that  a  writer  of  such  rare  power  and  grace 
should  have  left  us  only  a  single  monument  of 
his  genius,  and  that  a  mere  letter,  written  for  a 
definite  practical  purpose,  and  that  his  name 
should  have  been  entirely  forgotten  within  less 
than  a  century  after  his  death,  serves  to  remind 
us  in  a  very  forcible  way  of  the  limitations  of  our 
knowledge  respecting  the  early  days  of  Christian- 
ity. ...  In  that  age  names  meant  nothing; 
literature  meant  still  less.  The  Spirit  of  God 
speaking  in  and  through  believers  was  everything. 
.  .  .  Subsequent  generations  retained  for  the 
most  part  only  what  was  supposed  to  be  apostolic, 
and  only  because  it  was.  And  all  those  who 
could  not  lay  claim  to  the  dignity  of  apostles 
passed  into  oblivion,  and  the  few  brief  and  scat- 
tered products  of  their  pens  which  have  survived 
the  ravages  of  time,  owe  their  preservation  to 
the  fact  that  they  were  fortunate  enough  to  lose 
their  identity  and  to  get  themselves  attached  in 
one  way  or  another  to  some  apostolic  name." 

As  has  been  intimated,  the  epistle  reveals  a  pur- 
pose to  include  Christians  generally,  and  not  sim- 
ply Jews,  in  its  teachings  and  appeals.  The  use 
of  Old  Testament  material  was  common  to  the 
whole  Church  which  looked  upon  these  Scrip- 
tures as  the  only  authoritative  writings  at  the 
first.    It  belonged  to  Gentile  and  Jew  alike,  as  all 


212    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

were  *'  children  of  faithful  Abraham."  Dr.  Mc- 
Giffert  notes  that  **  in  the  practical  exhortations 
and  warnings  with  which  the  epistle  is  filled,  and 
which  reveal  most  clearly  the  real  aim  it  was 
written  for,  nothing  whatever  is  said  about  apos- 
tasy to  Judaism.  The  readers  are  never  warned 
against  falling  back  into  the  religion  of  Moses, 
although  if  that  is  what  the  author  feared,  it 
would  seem  that  he  could  hardly  have  failed, 
when  he  contrasted  the  new  covenant  with  the 
old,  to  call  direct  attention  to  the  folly  of  de- 
serting the  one  for  the  other.  But  instead  of 
doing  that,  he  draws  lessons  of  an  entirely  differ- 
ent kind :  '  How  shall  we  escape,  if  we  neglect 
so  great  salvation  ?  '  '  Take  heed  lest  there  shall 
be  in  any  one  of  you  an  evil  heart  of  unbelief/ 
*  Let  us  draw  near  with  boldness  that  we  may 
receive  mercy.'  '  Be  not  sluggish,  but  imitators 
of  them  who  through  faith  and  patience  inherit 
the  promises.'  And  when  the  author  warns  his 
readers  against  the  worst  of  all  sins, — the  wilful 
denial  and  repudiation  of  Christ,  after  once  ac- 
cepting him — there  is  no  sign  that  he  thinks  of 
such  apostasy  as  due  to  the  influence  of  Judaism, 
or  as  connected  with  it  in  any  way."  Not  only  is 
this  true,  but  there  are  some  passages  which  sug- 
gest Gentiles  as  the  object  of  the  writer's 
thought :  "  How  much  more  shall  the  blood  of 
Christ  cleanse  your  conscience  from  dead  works 
to  serve  the  living  God  ?  "  This  points  to  Chris- 
tians who  had  come  out  of  heathenism.    In  most 


The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews        213 

of  Paul's  fields  the  disciples  were  thought  of,  not 
as  Jews  or  Gentiles,  but  as  Christians.  And  this 
general  thought  of  the  believers  to  whom  this 
letter  is  sent  is  entirely  consistent  with  the  whole 
tone  of  it. 

Without  presenting  a  detailed  analysis  of  the 
epistle,  it  may  be  important  to  show  how  the  au- 
thor clearly  reveals  a  difference  in  his  conceptions 
from  those  which  characterize  the  writings  of 
Paul,  although  there  is  a  sympathy  with  the  Paul- 
ine thought  in  much  of  it.  It  is  apparent  that  the 
author  looks  upon  salvation  as  largely  a  future 
blessing,  for  which  the  faithful  are  to  endure  unto 
the  end.  Paul's  dominant  idea  is  that  salvation 
is  a  freedom  from  the  flesh  here  and  now  increas- 
ingly, with  the  Spirit  of  Christ  dwelling  in  us  and 
transforming  the  character.  The  author  agrees 
with  Paul  that  the  old  covenant  is  abrogated ;  but 
he  finds  the  reason  for  this  to  be,  not  because  of 
a  radical  difference,  but  because  the  old  was  an 
imperfect  shadow  of  that  which  is  to  be  perfectly 
realized  in  the  new.  Moreover  in  realizing  the 
aim  of  the  new  covenant,  the  author  finds  a  larger 
place  for  the  life  of  Christ  than  is  often  given. 
The  importance  of  His  death  is  not  minimized, 
but  the  fact  that  "  when  He  came  into  the  world. 
He  said,  Lo!  I  come  to  do  Thy  will,  O  God," 
points  to  an  appreciation  of  the  obedience  which 
He  rendered  to  the  Father,  in  the  fulfilling  of  all 
righteousness,  which  gave  value  to  His  death  as 
the  spotless  Lamb  of  God. 


214    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

Again  this  epistle,  while  assuming  the  resur- 
rection, passes  by  that  fact,  which  has  such 
large  place  in  Paul's  thought,  and  dwells 
upon  the  work  of  Christ  now  as  our  Ad- 
vocate at  the  throne  of  God.  In  the  exercise 
of  His  high-priestly  office,  this  part  of  Christ's 
mediation  still  goes  on,  which  it  is  vitally  impor- 
tant that  His  people  should  realize.  In  all  this, 
the  author  puts  into  the  priestly  duty  the  work  of 
sanctifying  His  followers.  This  is  very  impor- 
tant, because  it  was  not  a  part  of  the  duty  of  the 
Jewish  priest.  What  Christ  is  now  doing  in 
heaven  for  us  is  His  supreme  work,  and  we  not 
only  have  forgiveness  of  sins  because  of  His 
finished  work  when  He  was  in  the  flesh,  and  died 
on  the  cross;  but  we  have  His  continued  help  in 
our  sanctification  through  His  Spirit.  All  the 
story  of  the  earthly  experience  is  made  to  reveal 
the  purpose  of  Christ  to  become  fitted  for  this 
work,  as  when  we  read  in  ii :  17-18:  "Where- 
fore in  all  things  it  behooved  him  to  be  made  like 
unto  his  brethren,  that  he  might  be  a  merciful  and 
faithful  high  priest  in  things  pertaining  to  God, 
to  make  reconciliation  for  the  sins  of  the  people. 
For  in  that  he  himself  hath  suffered,  being 
tempted,  he  is  able  to  succour  them  that  are 
tempted."  Perhaps  this  contribution  is  the  most 
distinctive  in  the  epistle,  and  its  sympathy  with 
Paul's  teaching  is  at  once  in  keeping  with  its 
different  emphasis  from  that  which  dominated 
Paul's  attitude  toward  Christ. 


The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews        aij 

Before  turning  from  this  epistle,  it  is  important 
to  note  how  it  contributes  a  special  emphasis  upon 
the  historic  jMoses  and  the  historic  Tabernacle.  It 
may  be  said,  of  course,  that  all  this  discussion  of 
the  historic  fundamentals  of  the  Mosaic  law  and 
ceremony  was  simply  the  taking  from  the  record 
that  which  was  in  its  present  form  when  the  au- 
thor prepared  his  letter,  and  that  he  simply  used 
the  records  without  in  any  way  adding  anything 
to  the  evidence  for  historicity  of  the  accounts  of 
Moses  and  the  features  of  the  system  discussed. 
But  when  we  read :  '*  Moses  verily  was  faithful 
in  all  his  house,  as  a  servant,  for  a  testimony  of 
those  things  which  w^ere  to  be  spoken  after ;  but 
Christ  as  a  Son  over  his  own  house,"  we  feel  a 
sense  of  reliability  which  reminds  us  that  at  the 
time  of  the  apostles  the  universal  conviction  of 
the  reality  of  the  establishment  of  the  theocracy, 
as  the  record  indicates,  strengthens  the  ground 
for  beHeving  the  national  faith  was  not  built  upon 
a  fiction  which  was  foisted  in  any  way  upon  the 
people,  but  upon  a  fact  whose  actual  character 
was  the  basis  of  all  prophetic  utterance  and  all 
requirement  on  the  part  of  the  Christian  leaders 
as  well.  The  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  is  a  strong 
confirmation  of  the  faith  of  the  people  in  the  his- 
toric Moses,  with  his  work  in  the  Camp  and 
Tabernacle  at  the  beginning  of  Israel's  national 
life. 


XXVI 

THE  WRITINGS  OF  JOHN 

THE  writings  which  tradition  has  attributed 
to  John  the  beloved  disciple,  are  the 
three  letters  which  bear  his  name,  the 
Book  of  Revelation  and  the  Fourth  Gospel.  It 
is  generally  conceded  that  the  first  of  the  epistles 
and  the  Fourth  Gospel  are  written  by  the  same 
man.  As  to  the  other  writings  there  is  great 
divergence  of  view.  Dr.  McGiffert's  statement 
regarding  the  two  short  letters  sums  up  the  sub- 
ject for  us  thus  :  "  The  two  brief  epistles  known 
as  Second  and  Third  John  were  written  by  one 
hand,  and  at  about  the  same  time.  Whether  they, 
too,  are  by  the  author  of  the  Gospel  and  of  the 
First  Epistle  of  John  is  not  certain.  The  use  of 
the  term  *  elder '  in  the  opening  salutation  is 
against  the  identification,  as  are  also  certain  dif- 
ferences in  style.  But  on  the  other  hand  there 
are  striking  resemblances  both  in  thought  and  in 
language  which  naturally  suggest,  and  indeed 
make  it  quite  probable,  that  the  author  was  the 
same  in  both  cases.  Tradition  does  not  help  us 
in  the  matter,  for  it  begins  very  late,  and  even 
then  is  not  unanimous.  Some  of  the  fathers  as- 
cribe the  letters  to  the  apostle  John,  others  to 
216 


The  Writings  of  John  217 

John  the  presbyter,  others  are  in  doubt  as  to  their 
authorship.  But  at  any  rate,  even  if  not  identical 
with  the  author  of  the  first  epistle  the  writer  of 
the  two  short  epistles  must  have  belonged  to  the 
same  school  and  breathed  the  same  atmosphere, 
and  must  have  been  familiar  with  the  Johanine 
literature." 

This  statement  practically  leaves  no  opposition 
to  the  strong  claims  that  are  made  for  the  identity 
of  authorship  by  many  scholars.  It  is  urged  that 
the  first  and  second  epistles  reveal  the  same  hand 
by  fully  as  much  evidence  as  could  be  demanded. 
The  strongly  marked  style  of  the  Fourth  Gospel 
and  the  First  Epistle  is  also  conspicuous  in  the 
Second  Epistle  and  is  not  lacking,  though  not 
quite  so  conspicuous,  in  the  third.  The  two  great 
characteristics  of  this  style  are  profound  thought 
and  simplicity  of  language.  The  key  to  the  sub- 
ject, therefore,  is  to  be  found  in  the  solution  of 
the  problem  of  the  authorship  of  the  Fourth  Gos- 
pel. The  most  satisfactory  recent  discussion  of 
this  subject  is  by  Dr.  Marcus  Dods,  in  The  Ex- 
positor's Greek  Testament.  Dr.  Dods  emphasizes 
the  importance  of  this  inquiry  because  "  in  no 
other  Gospel  have  we  the  direct  testimony  of  an 
eye-witness.  Luke  expressly  informs  us  that  his 
information,  although  carefully  sifted,  is  at 
second  hand.  .  .  .  But  the  Fourth  Gospel  pro- 
fesses to  be  the  work  of  an  eye-witness,  and  of 
an  eye-witness  who  enjoyed  an  intimacy  with  our 
Lord,  allowed  to  none  besides.    .    .    .    The  au- 


21 8    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

thor  of  the  Gospel  not  only  expresses  his  own 
belief  in  our  Lord's  divinity,  but  he  puts  words 
into  the  mouth  of  Jesus,  which  even  on  close  scru- 
tiny seem  to  many  to  form  an  explicit  claim  to 
preexistence  and  thus  to  imply  a  claim  to 
divinity.  .  .  .  If  an  apostle  was  responsible 
for  the  Gospel,  then  the  probability  is  that  the 
utterances  which  are  referred  to  Christ  nearly,  if 
not  absolutely,  represent  His  very  words,  and 
that  the  doctrinal  position  of  the  author  himself 
is  not  one  we  can  lightly  set  aside." 

Dr.  Dods,  in  noting  the  external  evidence  of 
Johanine  authorship,  begins  with  the  statement 
that  at  the  end  of  the  second  century  this  Gospel 
was  accepted  as  the  work  of  the  apostle  John,  and 
was  recognized  as  canonical.  The  opponents  of 
Johanine  authorship  have  declared  it  "  totally  un- 
necessary "  to  account  for  this  very  important 
fact,  but  Dr.  Dods  insists  that  the  fact  cannot 
thus  be  dismissed  easily.  He  quotes  with  ap- 
proval the  statement  of  Archdeacon  Watkins  con- 
cerning the  fathers  of  the  time  "  that  these  in- 
dividual witnesses  were  men  of  culture  and  rich 
mental  endowment,  with  full  access  to  materials 
for  judgment,  and  full  power  to  exercise  that 
judgment;  that  their  witness  was  given  in  the 
face  of  hostile  heathenism  and  opposing  heresy, 
which  demanded  caution  in  argument  and  reserve 
in  statement;  and  that  this  witness  is  clear,  defi- 
nite, unquestioned." 

There  was  only  one  prominent  exception  to  this 


The  Writings  of  John  ^1^ 

universal  recognition  in  the  person  of  Marcion. 
But  it  is  pointed  out  that  the  fact  that  IMarcion 
rejected  John's  Gospel,  which  was  on  doctrinal 
grounds,  and  not  a  denial  that  John  wrote  it,  not 
only  shows  that  it  had  been  accepted  before  his 
day  (170),  but  also  that  in  spite  of  the  opposition 
of  Marcion,  the  fathers  maintained  their  view. 
Irenseus  (180)  accepted  it  as  John's,  and  the  sig- 
nificance of  this  is  the  fact  that  Irenseus  was  the 
pupil  of  Polycarp,  who  was  the  disciple  of  John. 
About  the  year  150  Tatian  published  a  Harmony 
of  the  four  Gospels,  and  Prof.  Sanday  shows 
that  the  text  used  in  this  work  of  Tatian  "  does 
not  represent  the  original  autograph  of  the  Gos- 
pel, nor  a  first  copy  of  it,  but  that  several  copy- 
ings must  have  intervened  between  the  original 
and  Tatian's  text."  Dr.  Sanday  asserts  that,  so 
far  as  he  knows,  the  German  critics  have  over- 
looked this  important  fact. 

Coming  to  an  earlier  date,  we  note  that 
the  one  extant  writing  of  Polycarp,  written 
about  no,  quotes  from  the  First  Epistle  of 
John,  and  since  no  one  doubts  that  it  came 
from  the  same  hand  as  the  Gospel,  we  must 
fix  the  time  of  his  activity  before  no.  Ezra 
Abbott  points  out  the  fact  that  the  Gnostics  ac- 
cepted the  Gospel  as  John's  about  the  year  120, 
which  means  that  "  they  received  it  because  they 
could  not  help  it.  They  would  not  have  admitted 
the  authority  of  a  book  which  could  only  be 
reconciled  with  their  doctrines  by  most  forced 


a2o    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

interpretation,  if  they  could  have  destroyed  its 
authority  by  denying  its  genuineness.  Its  genu- 
ineness could  then  be  easily  ascertained.  .  .  . 
The  fact  of  the  reception  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  as 
his  work  at  so  early  a  date,  by  parties  so  violently 
opposed  to  each  other,  proves  that  the  evidence 
of  its  genuineness  was  decisive." 

Turning  to  the  internal  evidence,  Dr.  Dods 
follows  the  usual  items  considered  by  scholars, 
showing  that  the  writer  was  (i)  a  Jew,  (2)  a 
Palestinian,  (3)  an  eye-witness,  (4)  the  apostle 
John.  The  first  three  of  these  points  need  not 
occupy  our  time,  for  they  are  generally  conceded. 
These  do  not,  however,  in  some  minds  lead  to  the 
fourth  point.  In  xxi :  24,  the  writer  of  this  Gos- 
pel is  identified  with  the  disciple  whom  Jesus 
loved.  In  the  other  Gospels  John  is  frequently 
mentioned  by  name.  In  this  Gospel  he  is  not 
mentioned  by  name,  and  the  most  natural  and 
sufficient  explanation  of  this  fact  is  that  John  was 
its  author.  But  it  is  objected  that  this  Gospel 
(i)  has  a  universalism  not  consistent  with  what 
we  know  of  John  as  a  pillar  in  the  Jewish  church. 
But  if  the  long  years  intervening  before  John 
wrote  had  not  broadened  his  thought,  it  would 
be  strange  indeed.  We  find  just  what  we  would 
expect  in  this  regard.  (2)  There  is  a  philoso- 
phical colouring  not  likely  to  be  found  in  the  writ- 
ing of  a  Galilean  fisherman.  This  again  presumes 
that  the  youth  John  had  made  no  progress 
through  sixty  years  of  growth  and  study.     At 


The  Writings  of  John  221 

best  the  traces  of  a  philosophy  in  John  have  been 
exaggerated.  Doubtless  at  Ephesus  he  came  into 
contact  with  some  of  it,  but  the  Logos  idea  is  not 
so  much  philosophical,  as  it  is  the  essential  ex- 
pression of  Sonship.  Hamack  truly  says  :  "  The 
prologue  is  not  the  key  to  the  understanding  of 
the  Gospel,  but  is  rather  intended  to  prepare  the 
Hellenistic  reader  for  its  perusal/'  After  the  in- 
troduction, the  Logos  is  not  referred  to  again. 

(3)  It  is  claimed  that  John  depends  upon  the 
Synoptics  for  material,  and  has  not  the  originality 
of  an  eye-witness.  But  no  one  would  deny  that 
John  knew  the  Synoptics,  and  it  would  be  per- 
fectly natural  for  him  to  use  certain  familiar 
phrases,  especially  as  some  of  the  expressions 
must  have  been  the  exact  statements  of  fact,  such 
as  he  would  repeat  with  precision.  Even  when 
they  are  used  there  are  marks  of  change  in  the 
connections  which  suggest  an  original  witness. 
Dr.  Dods  shows  that  "  it  may  rather  be  said  that, 
in  several  instances,  we  find  additions  and  correc- 
tions which  are  requisite  for  the  understanding  of 
the  Synoptists.  From  the  first  three  Gospels  the 
reader  might  gather  that  our  Lord's  ministry  ex- 
tended over  only  one  year.  The  Fourth  Gospel 
definitely  mentions  three  Passovers,  with  a  pos- 
sible fourth  (ii :  13,  vi :  4,  xiii :  I,  and  v:  i)." 

The  independence  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  fur- 
ther shown  by  the  fact  that  much  is  introduced 
not  found  in  the  three  Synoptics.  The  account 
of  the  semi-public  ministry  previous  to  the  death 


112    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

of  the  Baptist,  the  omission  of  much  which  the 
others  contain,  as  unnecessary,  and  the  introduc- 
tion of  much  not  found  in  them,  as  important  sup- 
plementary material,  all  show  that  the  writer  had 
knowledge  beyond  the  records  already  possessed. 
This  is  explained  by  certain  critics  as  pointing  to 
some  of  John's  followers.  But  since  our  external 
evidence  goes  to  a  point  within  twenty  years  of 
John,  there  remains  no  reason  for  refusing  to 
admit  the  apostle  himself  as  the  authority  for 
these  statements  of  fact,  and  his  illuminating 
comments  upon  them. 

(4)  Perhaps  one  of  the  most  serious  dif- 
ficulties in  the  mind  of  many  critics  is  the 
presence  in  this  Gospel  of  so  many  lengthy 
addresses  and  conversations  not  mentioned 
in  the  other  Gospels.  Renan  puts  the  ob- 
jection strongly:  "  This  fashion  of  preaching  and 
demonstrating  without  ceasing,  this  everlasting 
argumentation,  this  artificial  get-up,  these  long 
discussions  following  each  miracle,  these  dis- 
courses, stiff  and  awkward,  whose  tone  is  so 
often  false  and  unequal,  are  intolerable  to  a  man 
of  taste  alongside  the  delicious  sentences  of  the 
Synoptists."  In  facing  this  consideration.  Dr. 
Dods  says : — "  The  narrative  portion  of  John 
may  be  said  to  exist  for  the  sake  of  the  verbal 
teaching.  The  miracles  which  in  the  first  three 
Gospels  appear  as  the  beneficent  acts  of  our  Lord 
without  ulterior  motive,  seem  in  the  Fourth  Gos- 
pel to  exist  for  the  sake  of  the  teaching  they 


The  Writings  of  John  223 

embody,  and  the  discussions  they  give  rise  to. 
Similarly,  the  persons  introduced,  such  as  Nico- 
demus,  are  viewed  chiefly  as  instrumental  in  elicit- 
ing from  Jesus  certain  sayings,  and  are  them- 
selves forgotten  in  the  conversation  they  have 
suggested." 

Coming  to  the  real  explanation.  Dr.  Dods 
continues:  "If  John  had  had  nothing  new 
to  tell,  no  fresh  aspect  of  Christ  or  His  teaching 
to  present,  he  would  not  have  written  at  all.  No 
doubt  each  of  the  Synoptists  goes  over  ground 
already  traversed  by  his  fellow-Synoptist,  but  it 
has  yet  to  be  proved  that  they  knew  one  another's 
work.  John  did  know  of  their  Gospels,  and  the 
very  fact  that  he  added  a  fourth  prepares  us  to 
expect  that  it  will  be  different.  .  .  .  That  there 
was  another  aspect  essential  to  the  completeness 
of  the  figure  was,  as  the  present  Bishop  of  Derry 
has  pointed  out,  also  to  be  surmised.  .  .  .  The 
faith  which  has  found  its  resting  place  in  the 
Christ  of  the  Synoptists  is  not  unsettled  or  per- 
plexed by  anything  it  finds  in  John.  They  are 
not  two  Christs  but  one,  which  the  four  Gospels 
depict :  diverse  as  the  profile  and  front  face,  but 
one  another's  complement  rather  than  contradic- 
tion." 

It  is  not  claimed  that  all  that  is  recorded  in  this 
Gospel  was  spoken  exactly  as  it  stands.  All 
critics  agree  that  John  must  necessarily  have  con- 
densed conversations  and  discourses.  Probably 
we  have  the  actual  words  of  the  most  striking 


124    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

sayings,  for  they  could  not  be  forgotten.  And 
this  especially  applies  to  the  sayings  of  Christ  re- 
garding Himself.  "  No  doubt,"  says  Dr.  Dods, 
"  in  the  last  resort  we  must  trust  John.  But 
whom  could  we  more  reasonably  trust  ?  "  More- 
over when  we  note  the  author's  statement  regard- 
ing his  object  in  writing  this  Gospel,  (xx:  31) 
"  that  ye  might  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ, 
the  Son  of  God,  and  that  believing  ye  might  have 
life  in  His  name,"  it  becomes  evident  that  he  is 
not  purposing  to  write  a  full  biography  of  Jesus, 
but  to  select  such  material  from  the  store  as  will 
most  readily  accomplish  his  aim.  His  reference 
to  the  fact  that  if  he  were  to  tell  all  that  Jesus 
said  and  did,  there  would  not  be  books  enough  to 
hold  it,  only  strengthens  the  sense  of  the  personal 
touch  of  the  eye-witness   in  the  story. 

It  is  evident  that  John  realized  that  this 
truth  needed  confirmation,  that  there  existed 
a  tendency  to  deny  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus. 
We  know  this  tendency  was  in  the  air  at 
the  end  of  the  first  century  in  certain  quar- 
ters. Dr.  Dods  utters  strong  words  just  at 
this  point:  "The  object  in  view  reflects  light 
on  the  historicity  of  the  contents  of  the 
Gospel.  The  writer  professes  to  produce  cer- 
tain facts  which  have  powerfully  influenced  the 
minds  of  men,  and  have  produced  faith.  If  these 
pretended  facts  were  fictions,  then  the  writer  is 
dishonest  and  beneath  contempt.  He  wishes  to 
produce  the  conviction  that  Jesus  is  the  Messiah, 


The  Writings  of  John  225 

and  to  accomplish  this  purpose  invents  incidents 
and  manipulates  utterances  of  Jesus.  A  writer  of 
romance  who  merely  wishes  to  please,  even  a 
preacher  whose  aim  is  edification,  might  claim  a 
certain  latitude  or  negligence  of  accuracy,  but  a 
writer  whose  object  is  to  prove  a  certain  proposi- 
tion stands  on  a  very  different  platform,  and  can 
only  be  pronounced  fraudulent  if  he  invents  his 
evidence."  The  reader  will  appreciate  the  force 
of  these  words  as  applied  to  certain  theories  of 
authorship  already  considered  in  the  discussion 
of  certain  Old  Testament  books.  The  argument 
applies  there  as  here. 

Concerning  John's  method  to  convince  his  read- 
ers that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God,  Dr.  Dods  says 
it  is  the  simplest  possible.  "  He  does  not  ex- 
pect that  men  will  believe  this  on  his  mere  word. 
He  sets  himself  to  reproduce  those  salient  features 
in  the  life  of  Jesus  which  chiefly  manifested  His 
Messianic  dignity  and  function.  He  believes  that 
what  convinced  himself  will  convince  others. 
One  by  one  he  cites  his  witnesses,  never  garbling 
their  testimony  nor  concealing  the  adverse  testi- 
mony, but  showing  with  as  exact  truthfulness 
how  unbelief  grew  and  hardened  Into  opposition, 
as  he  tells  how  the  faith  grew  till  it  culminated 
in  the  supreme  confession  of  Thomas,  '  My  Lord 
and  my  God.'  The  plan  of  the  Gospel  is  there- 
fore the  simplest.  It  falls  into  two  parts.  In  the 
first,  John  presents  those  scenes  in  which  Jesus 
made  those  self-revelations  which  it  was  essential 


226    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

the  world  should  see.  In  the  second  part  the  glory 
of  Christ  is  manifested,  culminating  in  His  tri- 
umph over  death." 

To  these  words  of  Dr.  Dods  should  be 
added  the  following  statement  of  Dr.  Mc- 
Giffert :  ''  The  Gospel  of  John  alone  reveals 
fully  the  secret  of  Christ's  marvellous  power  in 
His  profound  God-consciousness,  and  it  is  this 
that  gives  it  its  permanent  historic  as  well  as  re- 
ligious value.  It  constitutes  an  indispensable 
supplement  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels  for  the  his- 
torian who  would  know  not  simply  the  actual 
words  of  Jesus  and  the  course  of  His  daily  life, 
but  the  ultimate  basis  of  His  religious  ideas  and 
ideals,  and  thus  the  explanation  of  His  controlling 
and  abiding  influence." 

THE  BOOK   OF   REVELATION 

The  Hebrew  custom  of  naming  books  by  their 
initial  words  is  followed  here.  And  the  word  is 
descriptive  of  the  largest  part  of  the  contents  of 
the  book.  It  is  preeminently  an  apocalypse,  sug- 
gesting the  vision  of  Daniel.  The  book  bears  the 
name  of  John,  and  Justin  Martyr  identifies  the 
author  with  the  apostle.  Later  fathers  questioned 
its  apostolic  authorship,  and  Eusebius  reports 
that  in  his  day  many  ascribed  it  to  the  presbyter 
John,  of  whom  Papias  tells  us.  It  did  not  ap- 
pear in  some  of  the,  earliest  collections  of  the 
New  Testament,  and  was  rather  slow  in  finding 
its  place  in  the  Canon.    It  would  seem,  however, 


The  Writings  of  John  227 

that  one  principal  reason  for  this  was  that  the 
chiUasm  of  the  book  was  offensive  to  some  of  the 
fathers,  who  were  anxious  to  disprove  its  apos- 
tohc  authorship  on  this  account.  Dr.  McGiffert 
is  very  urgent  in  the  opinion  that  the  writer  of 
the  Apocalypse  could  not  have  been  the  author 
of  the  Fourth  Gospel  and  the  First  Epistle  of 
John.  He  notes  (i)  that  the  author  does  not 
himself  claim  to  be  an  apostle,  and  (2)  that  it 
represents  in  the  main  an  entirely  different  type 
of  thought. 

Much  turns  upon  the  time  when  it  is  prob- 
able the  book  was  written.  The  two  dates 
advocated  are  69  and  96.  The  reversed  figures 
are  easily  remembered.  The  advocates  of  the 
earlier  date  fix  John's  banishment  in  the  time 
of  the  Neronian  persecution,  and  believe  the 
Apocalypse  preceded  the  Fourth  Gospel  by  nearly 
thirty  years.  Canon  Westcott,  in  the  Speaker's 
Commentary,  argues  for  the  earlier  date.  He 
says  (i)  regarding  the  linguistic  phenomena: 
"  Nor  is  it  difficult  to  see  that,  in  any  case,  in- 
tercourse with  a  Greek-speaking  people  would  in 
a  short  time  naturally  reduce  the  style  of  the 
author  of  the  Apocalypse  to  that  of  the  author 
of  the  Gospel.  It  is,  however,  very  difficult  to 
suppose  that  the  language  of  the  writer  of  the 
Gospel  could  pass  at  a  later  time,  in  a  Greek- 
speaking  country,  into  the  language  of  the 
Apocalypse." 

Dr.  Westcott    is    recognized    as    one  of    the 


228    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

masters  of  the  linguistic  problems,  and  his 
judgment  on  this  point  is  especially  valuable. 
(2)  Regarding  the  doctrinal  expressions,  he 
says :  "  The  Apocalypse  is  doctrinally  the  uniting 
link  between  the  Synoptists  and  the  Fourth  Gos- 
pel. It  offers  the  characteristic  thoughts  of  the 
Fourth  Gospel  in  that  form  of  development 
which  belongs  to  the  earliest  apostolic  age.  It 
belongs  to  different  historical  circumstances,  to 
a  different  phase  of  intellectual  progress,  to  a 
different  theological  stage,  from  that  of  St. 
John's  Gospel ;  and  yet  it  is  not  only  in  harmony 
with  it  in  its  teachings,  but  in  the  order  of 
thought  it  is  the  necessary  germ  out  of  which 
the  Gospel  proceeded  by  a  process  of  life.  .  .  . 
The  Apocalypse  is  less  developed  both  in  thought 
and  style.  The  material  imagery  in  which  it  is 
composed  includes  the  idea  of  progress  in  inter- 
pretation. The  symbols  are  living.  On  the  othe'r 
hand,  to  go  back  from  the  teaching  of  the  Gos- 
pel to  that  of  the  Apocalypse,  to  clothe  clear 
thought  in  figures,  to  reduce  the  full  expression 
of  truth  to  its  rudimentary  beginnings,  seems  to 
involve  a  moral  miracle  which  would  introduce 
confusion  into  life." 

This  argument  is  not  only  in  behalf  of  the 
earlier  date,  as  is  apparent,  but  also  of  the  Johan- 
ine  authorship.  The  principal  explanation  of  the 
difference  of  opinion  which  has  all  along  arisen 
about  the  matter  is  the  fact  that  some  of  the 
fathers  assert  that  John's  banishment  was  in  the 


The  Writings  of  John  229 

time  of  Domitian.  Clement  of  Alexandria  says 
that  John  went  from  the  island  of  Patmos  "  after 
the  tyrant  was  dead  "  to  Ephesus,  and  that  from 
Ephesus  as  his  headquarters  he  used  to  go  into 
the  neighbouring  districts  to  appoint  bishops,  to 
regulate  churches,  and  to  ordain  clergy.  But 
Irenaeus  says  the  Apocalypse  was  seen  during 
the  reign  of  Domitian.  But  Domitian  did  not 
die  until  96,  and  it  is  not  probable  that  John  out- 
lived the  first  century.  Eusebius  places  the  long 
stay  of  John  in  Ephesus  after  his  return  from 
Patmos,  and  this  seems  to  be  generally  agreed 
upon ;  but  if  this  be  so,  it  seems  likely  that  "  the 
tyrant "  was  mistakenly  supposed  by  Irenaeus  to 
be  Domitian,  and  that  Eusebius  quoted  him,  fol- 
lowing the  mistake. 

Tertullian  in  a  famous  passage  about  Rome 
says :  "  Where  Peter  suffered  a  death  like  our 
Lord's;  where  Paul  was  beheaded  like  John 
the  Baptist;  and  where  the  Apostle  John 
after  being  plunged  into  burning  hot  oil 
without  being  hurt,  was  banished  to  an 
island."  The  only  point  to  this  which  is  signifi- 
cant is  that  the  association  of  John's  persecution 
with  that  of  Peter  and  Paul  would  point  to  the 
earlier  persecution  of  Nero.  IMoreover  Tertullian, 
in  speaking  of  Domitian,  says  his  was  a  milder 
persecution  than  that  of  Nero,  and  implies  that  he 
restored  those  he  had  banished,  but  no  mention 
is  made  of  John.  While  all  this  is  not  conclu- 
sive, it  points  to  the  earlier  date  for  the  Apoc- 


230    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

alypse,  and  also  strengthens  the  opinion  that  it 
came  from  the  pen  of  the  Apostle.  Dr.  McGif- 
fert  argues  that  the  strong  hatred  of  the  State  as 
the  enemy  of  the  Church,  revealed  in  the  book, 
points  to  a  later  date,  for  this  hatred  did  not 
exist  earlier.  But  Paul's  Roman  citizenship  gave 
him  a  different  point  of  view  of  the  State,  and 
we  can  understand  how  the  persecutions,  whether 
early  or  late,  would  explain  any  Judaistic  sense 
of  the  enmity  between  the  kingdoms  of  the  earth 
and  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven. 

The  book  of  Revelation  has  largely  been  a 
sealed  book  to  the  average  man,  notwithstanding 
the  assertion  that  "  blessed  is  he  who  reads  these 
words  of  teaching  and  they  also  who  hear  and 
keep  the  things  written  therein."  Victor  Hugo, 
when  he  himself  was  an  exile,  said :  "  In  reading 
the  poem  of  Patmos  some  one  seems  to  push  you 
from  behind."  In  their  days  of  trial  and  perse- 
cution the  disciples  were  looking  for  the  return 
of  their  Lord.  Jesus  had  spoken  to  them  of  the 
words  of  the  prophet  Daniel,  and  naturally  they 
studied  again  the  message  of  that  prophet.  John 
had  evidently  done  this,  for  two  of  Daniel's  great 
visions  form  the  framework  on  which  John's 
vision  is  built.  The  book  deals  with  conditions 
and  principles  rather  than  with  particular  places 
and  individuals.  In  allegory  and  symbol  the 
vision  of  the  victory  of  Christ  and  His  redeemed 
is  pictured  with  a  sublime  exaltation  of  sustained 
thought.    "  The  things  that  are,"  the  things  then 


The  Writings  of  John  231 

current,  are  considered  in  the  letters  to  the  Seven 
Churches,  in  their  relation  to  their  Lord  and  to 
the  world.  "  The  things  past "  are  unfolded 
from  the  sealed  book  and  expressed  in  cryptic 
terms.  The  story  of  the  past  is  the  shadow  of 
the  **  things  that  must  be  hereafter." 

The  divisions  of  the  book  are  not  chro- 
nological, but  a  series  of  pictures  which  pre- 
sent the  same  teaching  from  different  points 
of  view.  "  The  lines  between  the  sensible 
and  the  spiritual  are  absent.  Neither  time 
nor  death  separates  Christ  from  His  apostles 
and  His  Church."  This  is  not  the  place 
to  venture  an  interpretation  of  the  book,  but 
the  writer  wishes  to  call  attention  to  a  recent 
publication  on  the  subject  which  bears  the  rather 
fantastic  title  Mystery  of  The  Golden  Cloth  by 
the  Rev.  J.  S.  Hughes.  It  is  the  most  satis- 
factory study  of  the  Apocalypse,  taken  all  in  all, 
of  which  he  knows.  The  writer  is  one  of  those 
who  believe  this  book  will  take  a  more  satis- 
factory place  in  the  future  thought  of  the 
Church  than  it  has  had  heretofore.  The  day  will 
come  when  the  people  of  God  will  respond  to  the 
triumphant  strain  which  sounds  through  it,  as- 
suring the  ultimate  victory  and  unending  joy  of 
the  Lord  of  our  salvation  and  His  redeemed  out 
of  every  kindred  and  tongue  and  people  and 
nation. 


XXVII 

THE    PLACE    OF    MIRACLES 

THE  student  of  the  movement  of  Criticism 
quickly  discovers  that  the  extreme  crit- 
ics deny  the  supernatural  in  every  form. 
Statements  in  the  text  regarding  divine  revela- 
tions and  miraculous  manifestations  are  dis- 
missed by  them  as  fictitious  and  not  worthy  of 
credence.  Moreover  many  Christian  students  are 
sympathetic  v^^ith  the  idea  that  it  would  be  a 
great  gain  to  the  cause  of  truth  if  less  were  made 
of  the  importance  of  miracles,  and  more  stress 
laid  upon  the  abiding  verities  of  spiritual  truth 
and  righteous  living.  A  discussion  of  this  subject 
is  therefore  important  as  bearing  upon  the  whole 
field  of  historic  and  literary  Criticism,  especially 
as  it  involves  the  naturalistic  theories  to  which 
certain  critics  are  so  strongly  wedded. 

When  we  turn  to  consider  the  place  of  miracle 
in  the  Old  Testament  records,  it  is  vitally  es- 
sential that  we  keep  in  mind  the  actual  condition 
of  the  masses  of  the  people.  They  were  ignorant 
and  undisciplined.  Only  a  very  few  could  read, 
and  the  multitude  was  compelled  to  receive  the 
truth  from  the  lips  of  these  few  chosen  men.  The 
importance  of  this  fact  as  related  to  the  revelation 
232 


The  Place  of  Miracles  2^;^ 

of  truth  is  far-reaching.  All  revelation  must  be 
on  the  principle  of  accommodation  to  the  limita- 
tions of  the  people  to  be  instructed.  Modern 
pedagogy  has  discovered  the  importance  of  the 
object  lesson  for  the  child.  But  Froebel  might 
have  learned  his  new  appreciation  of  its  value 
if  he  had  studied  the  method  of  divine  revelation 
to  men. 

There  was  no  other  method  possible  for 
the  education  of  the  people  comparable  to  this. 
It  was  the  kindergarten  age  of  the  world-school, 
and  the  method  was  by  far  the  most  effective 
possible.  The  translation  of  Enoch  taught  the 
truth  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul  as  nothing 
else  could  have  done  at  the  time.  Its  purpose 
was  not  apologetic  so  much  as  pedagogical.  It 
was  to  illuminate  the  truth  rather  than  to  prove 
it.  Moreover  all  the  religions  round  about  were 
characterized  by  manifestations  of  power  by  ma- 
gicians and  necromancers,  and  the  conviction 
that  Jehovah  was  possessed  of  power  which 
surpassed  that  of  these  experts  in  the  mysteries 
was  vital  to  a  compelling  faith  on  the  part  of  the 
chosen  people. 

This  suggests  the  very  important  considera- 
tion of  the  real  philosophy  of  miracle.  Its  pur- 
pose was  to  authenticate  the  messenger  of  Je- 
hovah by  such  manifestation  of  power,  in  con- 
nection with  his  message,  as  convinced  the  people 
that  Jehovah  was  a  mightier  God  than  their  gods 
in  whom  they  were  trusting.     Thus  in  the  mis- 


234    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

sion  of  Moses  the  plagues  in  Egypt  smote  Egyp- 
tian gods  one  after  another,  until  this  one  great 
truth  convinced  both  Israel  and  Egypt  that  Je- 
hovah's power  was  supreme.  So  in  the  test  of 
Elijah  at  Mt.  Carmel,  the  significance  of  the 
challenge  was  in  the  fact  that  Baal  was  the  sun- 
god,  and  the  test  of  fire  would  be  final  for  him. 
Keeping  this  principle  in  mind,  let  us  consider 
the  book  of  Jonah,  so  much  discussed  in  connec- 
tion with  this  subject.  If  we  consider  the  ref- 
erence to  Jonah  as  the  son  of  Amittai  as  identi- 
fying the  prophet  with  that  Jonah  who  prophesied 
in  the  time  of  Jeroboam  11. ,  then  we  are  in  the 
great  miracle  period  of  Elijah  and  Elisha.  The 
fact  is  emphasized  by  Rawlinson  and  others  that 
at  this  time  the  principal  god  of  Nineveh  was 
Dagon  the  fish-god,  whose  image  appeared  three 
times  as  frequently  as  that  of  any  other  god. 

If  the  philosophy  of  miracle  is  to  be  consistently 
maintained,  then  in  connection  with  Jonah's  mis- 
sion to  Nineveh  some  manifestation  of  Jehovah's 
power  must  involve  the  superiority  of  Israel's 
God  over  Dagon.  The  situation  is  even  strength- 
ened if  you  declare  Jonah  to  be  an  allegory.  If 
the  writer  of  this  parable  created  the  story  out 
of  his  imagination  for  the  moral  presented,  then 
he  so  fully  realized  the  philosophy  of  miracle  as 
to  see  that  he  must  present  his  prophet  as  au- 
thenticated in  the  same  manner  that  other  proph- 
ets were,  and  that  a  great  fish  must  figure  in  the 
story  in  order  that  Jehovah  should  be  proved  su- 


The  Place  of  Miracles  235 

perior  to  Dagon  to  the  people  of  Nineveh.  Thus 
we  are  strengthened  at  either  horn  of  the  di- 
lemma, for  the  purpose  of  the  miracle  is  consist- 
ently maintained.  It  was  God's  way  of  teaching 
which  was  the  most  effective  at  the  time,  and 
therefore  the  best  possible  way. 

When  we  approach  the  New  Testament,  we 
find  our  Lord  defining  the  place  and  limitations 
of  the  miracle,  as  in  his  words  to  Philip,  in  John 
xiv:  lo-ii,  "  Believest  thou  not  that  I  am  in  the 
Father,  and  the  Father  in  me  ?  the  words  that  I 
speak  unto  you  I  speak  not  of  myself;  but  the 
Father  that  dwelleth  in  me,  he  doeth  the  works. 
Believe  me  that  I  am  in  the  Father,  and  the 
Father  in  me;  or  else  beHeve  me  for  the  very 
works  sake."  Then  again  in  His  words  to 
Thomas  in  John  xx :  29,  "  Jesus  saith  unto  him, 
Thomas,  because  thou  hast  seen  me,  thou  hast 
believed;  blessed  are  they  that  have  not  seen 
me,  and  yet  have  believed."  Here  we  find  a  real 
value  set  upon  the  miracle  as  a  help  to  faith ;  but 
a  teaching  that  a  better  day  would  come  when 
men  would  not  need  these  objective  helps,  and 
would  discern  the  spiritual  truth  for  itself. 

But  let  not  those  who  may  have  reached 
this  higher  level  of  apprehension  of  the 
truth  forget  that  the  children  of  the  kinder- 
garten were  not  as  far  advanced.  The 
transition  was  slowly  making  headway  at  the 
time  of  Christ,  and  He  saw  the  better  day; 
but    the    people  were  still  to  find    help  in    the 


236    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

objective  lesson,  with  its  manifestation  of  power 
and  illumination  of  truth.  We  recall  what  Dr. 
Dods  said,  that  "  the  miracles  which  in  the  first 
three  Gospels  appear  as  the  beneficent  acts  of 
our  Lord  without  ulterior  motive,  seem  in  the 
Fourth  Gospel  to  exist  for  the  sake  of  the  teach- 
ing they  embody,  and  the  discussions  they  give 
rise  to."  This  suggests  that  John  saw  the  real 
value  of  the  miracle,  as  the  Synoptists  did  not, 
and  set  it  forth  in  its  relation  to  truth  as  an 
illumination  rather  than  an  argument. 

And  yet  it  would  be  a  great  mistake  to  en- 
courage the  view  that  the  presence  of  the  miracle 
justifies  the  opinion  that  the  record  is  unhistorical. 
Dr.  Bruce  discusses  this  subject  vigorously  in  his 
introduction  to  the  three  synoptic  Gospels.  He 
says :  "  Those  who  count  the  miracle  impossible 
are  tempted  to  pronounce  the  record  of  the  heal- 
ing ministry  of  Christ  unhistorical.  This  is  not 
a  scientific  procedure.  The  question  of  fact 
should  be  dealt  with  separately  on  its  own 
grounds,  and  the  question  of  explicability  taken 
up  only  in  the  second  place.  There  are  good 
reasons  for  believing  that  the  healing  ministry, 
miraculous  or  not  miraculous,  was  a  great  fact 
in  the  public  career  of  Jesus.  Nine  acts  of  heal- 
ing, some  of  them  very  remarkable,  are  reported 
in  all  the  synoptical  Gospels.  The  healing  ele- 
ment in  the  ministry  is  so  interwoven  with  the 
didactic  that  the  former  cannot    be    eliminated 


The  Place  of  Miracles  237 

without  destroying  the  whole   story.       This  is 
frankly  acknowledged  by  Harnack. 

"  Still  more  significant  are  the  theories  in- 
vented to  explain  away  the  power. 
Men  do  not  theorize  about  nothing.  There  were 
remarkable  facts  urgently  demanding  explana- 
tion of  some  sort.  .  .  .  It  is  not  scien- 
tific to  neglect  the  phenomena  as  unworthy 
of  notice.  As  little  is  it  scientific  to  make 
the  solution  easy  by  understatement  of  the 
facts  to  be  explained.  .  .  .  Finally,  it  is 
not  to  be  supposed  that  these  healing  acts, 
though  indubitable  facts,  have  no  permanent 
reli2:ious  value.  Their  use  in  the  evidences  of 
Christianity  may  belong  to  an  antiquated  type 
of  apologetic,  but  in  other  respects  their  signifi- 
cance is  perennial.  Whether  miraculous  or  not, 
they  equally  reveal  the  wide-hearted  benevolence 
of  Jesus.  They  throw  a  side  light  on  His  doctrine 
of  God  and  man,  and  especially  on  His  conception 
of  the  ideal  of  life.  .  .  .  Jesus  had  no  sympa- 
thy with  the  hard  antithesis  between  spirit  and 
flesh." 

To  this  statement  it  will  be  fitting  to  add 
the  words  of  Dr.  Purves :  "  It  does  not  appear 
possible  to  account  for  the  rise  and  course  of 
apostolic  Christianity  except  by  the  recognition 
of  the  supernatural  facts  and  forces  to  which 
the  books  themselves  testify.  The  frank  ac- 
knowledgment of  the  supernatural,  together  with 


13  B    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

the  perception  of  the  no  less  truly  genetic  way  in 
which  the  original  faith  in  Jesus  as  Messiah  was 
unfolded  and  extended,  would  seem  to  be  re- 
quired of  the  historian  who  wishes  to  be  faith- 
ful to  his  sources  of  information  and  to  present 
apostolic  Christianity  as  it  was." 

Yet  the  statement  is  frequently  made  by  Chris- 
tian scholars  in  our  day  that  the  miracle  has  lost 
its  apologetic  value.  While  we  have  recognized 
that  it  is  not  necessary  for  some  people  to-day  in 
order  to  their  perception  of  the  truth;  yet  we 
have  one  of  the  most  suggestive  proofs  that  the 
statement  is  incorrect.  The  idea  back  of  the  state- 
ment, as  urged  by  the  anti-miracle  advocates,  is 
that  it  would  not  help  faith  to-day  if  the  teach- 
ing were  accompanied  by  the  healing  of  the  sick. 
But  what  is  the  secret  of  the  wide-spread  move- 
ment of  so-called  Christian  Science  but  this  very 
behef  in  healing  power?  The  devotee  of  this 
new  cult  will  insist  that  "  the  demonstration  "  is 
the  final  proof  of  the  reasonableness  of  his  faith. 
Thousands  of  intelligent  men  and  women,  of  a 
much  higher  grade  of  cultivation  than  was  known 
in  Bible  times,  are  thus  testifying  to  the  value  of 
healing  power  in  connection  with  a  new  teach- 
ing. Whatever  explanation  you  may  offer  of 
this  healing  which  is  actually  experienced  in 
several  of  these  cults  of  our  time,  the  fact  re- 
mains that  the  faith  in  the  teaching  is  strength- 
ened by  the  conviction  that  the  healing  power  is 
somehow  connected  with  the  knowledge  of  the 


The  Place  of  Miracles  239 

truth.      Human    nature    is    a    constant    quality 
through  the  years. 

But  beyond  this  instance  of  current  experience, 
it  is  important  to  emphasize  the  fact  that  the 
EvangeHcal  faith  of  Christendom  is  based  on  the 
miracle  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ.  Back  of 
that  is  the  miracle  of  the  incarnation.  It  is  the 
truth  of  a  divine  Christ  once  incarnate  and  for- 
ever victorious,  a  living  Saviour,  which  gives 
vitality  to  our  faith.  Christian  life  is  not  nour- 
ished by  the  memory  of  a  dead  man,  but  by  the 
fellowship  of  a  living  God.  Christ  is  something 
more  than  the  greatest  personality  of  the  past; 
He  is  the  greatest  personality  of  the  present.  It 
is  in  that  God-consciousness  which  breathes  in 
His  life,  as  pictured  to  us  by  John,  that  He  speaks 
to  men  saying :  "  I  lay  down  my  hfe  of  myself. 
No  man  taketh  it  from  me.  I  have  power  to  lay 
it  down,  and  I  have  power  to  take  it  again.  This 
commandment  have  I  received  of  my  Father." 
The  appreciation  of  His  continuing  work  as  our 
Advocate  involves  the  faith  in  a  mighty  putting 
forth  of  divine  power  in  His  exaltation  to  the 
throne  of  God.  This  manifestation  of  power  in 
all  the  history  of  God's  dealing  with  men,  from 
the  beginning  unto  this  hour,  is  the  throbbing 
life-blood  of  that  living  faith  in  God  and  God's 
love  for  mankind  which  runs  through  all  accep- 
tance of  revealed  truth  and  all  allegiance  to  the 
manifested  Christ. 


XXVIII 

CHRIST   AND    THE    CRITICS 

WHAT  position  must  we  take  concerning 
the  authority  of  Christ  as  a  teacher, 
in  so  far  as  His  attitude  toward  the 
Old  Testament  writings  involved  the  questions 
of  criticism?  There  are  two  views  held.  On 
the  one  hand,  the  extreme  critics  have  confidently 
urged  that  Christ  had  no  concern  about  these 
questions,  and  when  He  referred  to  Moses  or 
David,  He  simply  accommodated  Himself  to  the 
popular  opinions  of  the  day.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  extreme  conservatives  have  urged  that  unless 
Christ  knew  the  facts  about  the  literary  com- 
position of  the  Old  Testament  writings,  and  un- 
less He  was  incapable  of  referring  to  Moses  as 
having  written  a  part  of  the  Pentateuch,  should 
Moses  not  have  written  it;  then  Christ  was  not 
reliable  as  an  authority  and  not  infallible  as  a 
teacher.  Neither  of  these  positions,  held  baldly, 
is  justified  by  the  record. 

When  Christ  referred  to  the  Old  Testament, 
it  was  not  His  special  purpose  to  give  sanction 
to  the  general  view  about  the  man  who  may  have 
written  the  record.  He  was  not  primarily  con- 
cerned to  endorse  any  view  about  the  authorship 
240 


Christ  and  the  Critics  241 

of  the  same.  But  His  purpose  was  to  emphasize 
the  fact  that  the  authority  of  God  was  in  the 
truth  of  the  teaching  mentioned.  His  appeal 
was  to  the  teaching  as  having  God's  sanction. 
This  was  the  fact  which  gave  significance  to 
the  reference.  Now  this  meant  that  Christ 
counted  the  teachings  as  God-given,  by  the  hand 
of  whatever  individual.  Says  Dr.  Robertson 
Smith :  **  There  can  be  no  question  that  Jesus 
himself  beUeved  that  God  dealt  with  Israel  in 
the  way  of  special  revelation,  that  the  old  Testa- 
ment contains  within  itself  a  perfect  picture  of 
His  gracious  relations  to  His  people,  and  sets 
forth  the  whole  growth  of  the  true  religion  up 
to  its  perfect  fulness.  We  cannot  depart  from 
this  view  without  making  Jesus  an  imperfect 
teacher  and  an  imperfect  Saviour.  Did  He  who 
said,  '  No  man  knoweth  the  Father  but  the  Son 
and  He  to  whomsoever  the  Son  willeth  to  re- 
veal Him,'  did  He  mistake  His  Father  for  an- 
other in  the  pages  of  the  Old  Testament?  It  is 
incredible,  incredible  upon  any  theory  of  the  per- 
son of  Christ  that  can  be  held  by  Christians." 
All  this  involves  an  imperative  conviction  that 
Christ  recognized  the  historic  validity  of  the  Old 
Testament  record.  We  read  that  "  beginning  at 
Moses  and  the  prophets,  He  expounded  unto 
them  in  all  the  Scriptures  the  things  concerning 
Himself."  The  historical  value  of  the  record, 
which  so  many  critics  deem  unimportant,  must 
be  insisted  upon  as  we  note  Christ's  reference  to 


14-1    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

it.  Less  than  this  can  never  be  satisfactory. 
Not  that  Christ  endorsed  every  part  of  the  record 
as  actually  accurate  history;  but  that  though 
there  may  be  some  parts,  which  we  have  noted, 
which  seem  to  be  doubtful  as  history,  yet  the 
general  reliability  of  the  record  must  stand. 

But  on  the  other  hand,  it  will  be  a  great  mis- 
take to  lose  sight  of  the  real  character  of  Christ's 
authority  by  claiming  for  it  a  special  application 
to  such  questions  as  arise  in  the  realm  of  Criti- 
cism. Had  Christ  specifically  asserted  authority 
here,  the  situation  would  be  different.  But  He 
did  not.  His  insistance  upon  His  message  is  at 
the  point  where  it  illuminates  spiritual  realities 
and  nowhere  else.  Here  His  infallible  word 
never  fails.  Here  He  purposed  that  it  should 
reveal  its  power  as  the  eternal  truth  of  God. 
Here  He  unfolded  the  fundamental  principles 
underlying  man's  right  relation  to  God  and  to 
his  fellow-man,  largely  leaving  the  details  of  the 
application  of  those  principles  to  the  individual 
soul. 

Here  Christ's  authority  is  supreme,  infal- 
lible and  eternal.  It  might  have  been  so, 
doubtless,  in  other  spheres,  had  He  so  purposed. 
But  He  gives  us  no  ground  on  which  to  stand 
and  theorize  about  what  He  might  have  done. 
We  have  what  He  did.  There  let  us  rest,  and 
not  detract  from  the  clear-shining  glory  of  His 
power  as  the  living  Word  of  God  by  involving 
His  authority  at  points  where  He  Himself  did 


Christ  and  the  Critics  245 

not  apply  it.  The  literary  questions  are  sec- 
ondary. Christ's  work  was  the  fundamental 
work  of  giving  men  to  see  the  truth  of  God  as  it 
shines  upon  the  way  everlasting.  There  it 
shines  with  growing  brightness,  and  will  unto 
the  endless  day. 

Now  the  fact  is  that  in  thus  presenting  truth 
Christ  used  the  Old  Testament  as  it  was  in  His 
time,  and  as  it  is  in  our  day,  with  its  difficulties 
and  discrepancies.  That  did  not  mean  that  He 
accepted  all  of  it  as  binding  authority  in  His 
day,  for  He  set  much  of  it  aside.  We  must  not 
forget  His  words,  considered  so  revolutionary  by 
many  who  heard  them :  "  Ye  have  heard,"  etc ; 
but  "  I  say  unto  you,"  etc.  Nor  must  we  forget 
His  illuminating  commentary  upon  the  fact  of 
progressive  development  in  the  moral  standards 
set  up,  as  revelation  unfolded  a  higher  life  for 
the  people,  as  He  said :  **  For  the  hardness  of 
their  hearts  Moses  allowed,"  etc.  Things  al- 
lowed, though  not  acceptable  to  God,  and  now 
forbidden,  suggesting  other  things  which  have 
disturbed  many  a  reader  of  the  old  laws  and 
practices,  as  in  the  times  of  the  conquest:  these 
Christ  sets  aside  forever,  as  He  holds  up  a 
higher  standard,  and  reveals  God's  truth  more 
fully  to  men. 

All  of  which  means  that  Christ  pointed 
to  the  eternal  truth  in  the  Old  Testament, 
as  abiding  authority  for  the  spiritual  life, 
while  much  of  the  requirement  of  the  Scriptures 


244    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

was  no  longer  authoritative  as  expressive  of  the 
will  of  God.  The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  and 
Paul's  Epistles  to  the  Romans  and  Galatians 
make  this  truth  the  more  evident.  Christ  did  not 
tell  us  all  that  must  be  set  aside  now;  but  men 
are  agreeing  as  to  additional  items  of  Old  Tes- 
tament sanction  which  can  no  longer  be  supposed 
to  be  acceptable  to  God. 

If  this  fact  disturb  men,  and  they  say  we  have 
no  authority,  since  each  man  must  be  a  judge 
for  himself,  the  only  reply  to  make  is  that  men 
are  thus  judging  in  any  case,  and  must  always 
do  so.  Take,  for  example,  the  teachings  of  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  accepted  by  Christians 
as  being  Christ's  words  with  all  His  authority  in 
them.  What  do  we  see?  One  man  says  Christ 
meant  just  exactly  what  He  says  literally,  while 
another  says  He  did  not.  Let  us  consider  care- 
fully this  difiference  of  opinion  concerning  the 
accepted  teachings  of  our  Lord.  What  does  it 
compel  us  to  realize  regarding  Christ's  authority 
in  Scripture,  and  the  binding  authority  of  all 
Scripture?  It  simply  compels  recognition  of  the 
fact  that,  after  all,  the  individual  interpretation 
must  be  involved  in  the  compelling  character  of 
the  teaching. 

Protestantism  must  never  yield  one  atom 
of  that  right  of  individual  interpretation,  for 
the  virility  of  Christian  character  is  involved 
in  its  maintenance.  Men  must  be  compelled 
by  their  appreciation  of  the  truth  which  con- 


Christ  and  the  Critics  245 

strains  to  genuine  living,  to  righteousness  in 
all  life  and  every  part  of  it.  If  men  ask  how  we 
are  to  avoid  hopeless  confusion  by  thus  allowing 
the  individual  to  recognize  what  he  will  as  au- 
thoritative, our  answer  is  at  hand.  It  is  in  the 
apparent  fact  that,  while  men  are  thus  deciding 
for  themselves  what  is  binding  and  what  is  not, 
there  is  a  steady  growth  toward  a  consensus  of 
judgment  in  the  Christian  Church  regarding  the 
teachings  of  the  Master  and  of  the  Scriptures. 
That  consensus  has  always  been  practically  unan- 
imous through  the  centuries  regarding  the  fun- 
damentals of  Evangelical  faith,  the  great  foun- 
dation-truths and  facts  on  which  the  living  faith 
and  strengthening  life  of  Christians  are  built  to- 
day. 

As  regards  other  teachings,  supplementary  and 
secondary,  yet  essential  to  a  rounding  out  of  the 
body  of  the  truth,  men  are  coming  to  see  eye  to 
eye  more  and  more  as  the  years  pass.     Take  as 
an  illustration  the  matter  of  slavery.     Not  very 
long  ago  good  men,  earnest  Christians,  insisted 
that  they  found  divine  sanction  for  and  against 
this  institution,  and  the  camp  was  hopelessly  di- 
vided.  But  to-day  that  cloud  is  passing.   It  is  one 
of  many,  and  time  marks  the  clearing  of  the  sky. 
But  this  means  that  the  authority  of  the  Word 
of  God  is  not  found  in  the  fact  that  men  must 
accept  the  teaching  because  it  is  in  the   Bible. 
They   thought,   from   their   different    points    of 
view,    (education,  prejudice,   personal   relations, 


24-6    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

all  being  involved,)  that  they  both  saw  the  au- 
thority of  God  for  exactly  the  opposite  conditions 
of  Hfe. 

Therefore  no  mechanical  acceptance  of  any 
teaching  because  it  is  in  the  Bible  can  suf- 
fice. Men  must  and  will  see  the  constraint  of 
necessary  truth  in  that  teaching.  Christ's  teach- 
ing is  not  true  simply  because  Christ  said  it,  but 
He  said  it  because  it  is  true.  Our  reassurance  is 
in  the  fact  that  men,  the  more  they  have  come  to 
independent  and  honest  thinking,  the  more  they 
desire  the  constraint  of  the  truth  in  order  to 
righteousness,  are  being  brought  together  to  a 
clearer  judgment  touching  a  larger  reach  of  the 
truth,  and  all  life  is  taking  on  more  meaning  and 
promising  richer  fruitage.  This  is  our  ground 
for  an  unshaken  confidence  that  the  Spirit  who  is 
to  guide  into  all  truth  will  continue  to  guide, 
taking  the  things  of  Christ  and  making  them 
plain,  and  convicting  men  of  sin  and  righteous- 
ness and  judgment,  and  pointing  to  the  glory  of 
a  redeemed  manhood  through  Jesus  Christ. 


XXIX 

THE   PROBLEM    OF    INSPIRATION 

IT  is  reported  that  ex-President  Theodore 
Woolsey  was  requested,  some  years  before 
his  death,  to  prepare  an  article  for  a  leading 
quarterly  on  the  subject  of  inspiration.  He  posi- 
tively declined  on  the  ground  of  his  incompetency 
to  treat  a  subject  so  difficult.  Dr.  John  DeWitt, 
for  many  years  professor  at  New  Brunswick 
Seminary,  in  his  book  What  is  Inspiration,  re- 
fers to  this  incident,  and  adds :  "  We  cannot 
doubt  that  he  expressed  the  feeling  of  many  of 
those  who  are  best  qualified  to  deal  with  such 
mysteries.  Yet,  without  the  slightest  misgiving, 
they  have  yielded  their  mind,  heart,  and  will  to 
the  Scriptures  as  given  by  the  inspiration  of 
God.  Such  undoubting  faith  is  not  at  all  in- 
consistent with  a  confessed  inability  to  explain 
the  divine  energy  by  which  the  result  was  pro- 
duced. ...  We  may  feel  painfully  that  no 
theory  has  been  propounded  that  relieves  all  the 
difficulties  of  the  case,  yet  enjoy  an  unfaltering 
confidence  that  the  Bible  is  the  word  of  God. 
For  our  confidence  does  not  depend  upon  human 
theories  concerning  its  production,  but  upon  many 
infallible  proofs  of  the  divine  origin  both  of  the 
247 


248    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

Old  Testament  and  the  New,  and  these  intrinsic, 
wrought  into  their  substance,  and  filling  them 
with  light,  and  life,  and  power."  With  what 
better  words  could  we  approach  a  brief  consid- 
eration of  this  difficult  subject!  The  last  word 
has  not  yet  been  spoken  upon  it. 

There  have  been  various  theories  about  the 
exact  nature  of  the  sun ;  but  none  of  them  altered 
the  mighty  fact  that  the  sun  has  gone  on  shining, 
lighting  and  heating  the  earth,  ripening  harvests, 
drawing  water  for  the  clouds,  and  fulfilling  its 
functions  as  the  source  of  vitality  and  fruitful- 
ness  to  the  earth.  Just  so  the  various  theories 
as  to  the  exact  nature  of  inspiration  will  con- 
tinue to  have  their  advocates;  but  the  Bible  will 
remain  the  inspired  word  of  God,  the  only  in- 
fallible rule  of  faith  and  life  for  men.  There  was 
a  time  when  different  schools  of  Christians  had 
very  definite  theories  of  the  atonement.  But  of 
late  men  are  coming  to  realize  that  the  atone- 
ment is  too  large  a  fact  about  which  to  assume  to 
make  an  exact  and  all-sufficient  definition.  It 
must  involve  certain  great  vital  essentials  in 
God's  provision  of  salvation  through  Jesus  Christ 
for  men ;  but  not  many  would  venture  upon  the 
temerity  which  would  confidently  assert  a  final 
definition  of  the  atonement. 

Some  such  feeling  is  growing  in  the 
Church  regarding  the  definition  of  inspiration. 
It  is  a  fact  too  large  for  easy  definition. 
It  is  a  fact  attended  by  so    many    details    of 


The  Problem  of  Inspiration         249 

minor  fact  as  to  lead  the  most  reverent  and 
earnest  of  scholars  to  feel  that  we  would 
better  put  our  faith  in  the  fruit  of  it,  as  the 
blessed  gift  of  God,  as  we  do  in  the  atonement, 
and  not  suppose  that  we  will  lose  anything  of  the 
blessing  because  we  are  not  ready  to  make  a 
final  definition  of  it.  Let  devout  Christians  rest 
in  the  assurance  that  while  a  definition  of  such 
facts  as  inspiration  and  the  atonement  cannot 
easily  be  given  w^hich  will  satisfy  all  men,  yet 
the  blessed  facts  themselves  remain  with  all  their 
glorious  significance  for  believing  souls. 

This  is  all  the  more  important,  when  we  con- 
sider that  many  have  had  an  erroneous  idea 
about  a  definite  theory  of  inspiration  being  neces- 
sary to  a  vital  Christian  faith.  In  his  little  book 
Inspiration  of  The  Scriptures,  President  Patton, 
of  Princeton,  has  given  us  a  most  important 
statement  regarding  this  matter.  Dr.  Patton 
says :  "  I  must  take  exception  to  the  disposition 
on  the  part  of  some  to  stake  the  fortunes  of 
Christianity  on  the  doctrine  of  Inspiration.  Not 
that  I  yield  to  any  in  profound  conviction  of  the 
truth  and  importance  of  this  doctrine.  But  it  is 
proper  for  us  to  bear  in  mind  the  immense  argu- 
mentative advantage  which  Christianity  has, 
aside  altogether  from  the  inspiration  of  the  docu- 
ments on  which  it  rests.  I  cannot  agree  with  a 
recent  writer  (Garbett),  when  he  says,  'If  we 
take  away  the  inspired  character  of  the  Scripture 
narrative,  we  really  shall  possess  little  more  cer- 


250    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

tainty  with  regard  to  the  facts  of  our  Lord's 
life  than  we  do  to  the  facts  of  ancient  Roman 
history/  This  passage  I  cannot  but  look  upon 
as  too  great  a  concession  to  the  cause  of  Ra- 
tionalism. 

"  The  Christian  apologist  cannot  meet  in- 
fidel objections  by  assuming  the  doctrine  of 
Inspiration.  While  the  question  of  historical 
credibility  is  at  issue,  the  battle  must  be  fought 
on  the  ground  of  historical  evidence.  The  ro- 
mances of  Strauss  and  Renan  are  triumphantly 
answered  by  proving  the  early  origin  of  the 
Gospels.  .  .  .  Historical  criticism  places  the 
Bible  on  a  level  with  the  most  reliable  human 
histories.  Ordinary  historical  evidence  is  suf- 
ficient to  satisfy  us  with  regard  to  the  truthful- 
ness of  statements  which  we  find  in  the  writings 
of  Tacitus,  Caesar,  Grote,  Gibbon  and  Macaulay. 
We  do  not  insist  upon  inspiration  on  the  part  of 
these  authors  as  a  guarantee  of  their  credibility. 
Their  books  may  contain  errors.  Instances  of 
false  reasoning,  hasty  generalization,  incorrect 
judgment  may  occur  in  their  pages,  but  of  their 
general  truthfulness  we  have  no  doubt." 

Let  the  full  force  of  this  most  important  fact 
be  pondered  by  all  thoughtful  men.  Dr.  Patton 
proceeds  to  show  that  the  Bible  is  much  more  than 
a  reliable  historic  document,  but  he  advances  to 
that  consideration  "  from  its  credibility  as  a  lit- 
erary document."  We  have  shown  how  Egyp- 
tian and  Assyrian  monuments  confirm  the  his- 


The  Problem  of  Inspiration        251 

toric  reliability  of  Old  Testament  records,  and 
how  the  historic  material  of  the  early  Christian 
centuries  places  beyond  question  the  reliability  of 
the  New  Testament.  Therefore  we  have  the 
Bible  as  reliable  history,  which  is  not  dependent 
upon  any  theory  of  inspiration  for  its  acceptance. 

We  approach  this  record  for  the  purpose 
of  inquiring  into  its  character  as  the  rule 
of  faith  and  life  for  the  Christian  Church, 
and  we  remember  that  this  is  the  Bible 
which  is  proving  to  be  the  light  of  Ufe 
to  countless  men  and  women  through  the 
years  and  in  all  lands.  We  find  the  book  claim- 
ing to  be  the  revelation  of  God's  plan  for  the 
redemption  of  the  race.  The  necessity  for  this 
revelation  is  stated  in  the  Westminster  symbol 
thus :  "  Although  the  light  of  nature  and  the 
works  of  creation  and  providence  do  so  far  mani- 
fest the  goodness  and  wisdom  and  power  of  God 
as  to  leave  men  inexcusable;  yet  they  are  not 
sufficient  to  give  that  knowledge  of  God,  and  of 
His  will,  which  is  necessary  unto  salvation. 
Therefore  it  pleased  the  Lord  at  sundry  times 
and  in  divers  manners  to  reveal  Himself." 

This  revelation  purports  to  be  in  mani- 
festations of  divine  presence  and  power,  in 
messages  through  chosen  spokesmen,  in  mir- 
acles, in  providential  history,  and  finally  in 
the  person  and  work  of  Jesus  Christ,  to- 
gether with  the  outpouring  of  the  Holy 
Spirit     at     Pentecost     and     the     work     which 


a^Q.    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

the  Spirit  accomplished  through  the  Christian 
church  in  unfolding  the  truth  to  men  as  it  is  in 
Christ.  We  are  told  that  "  holy  men  spake  as 
they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost,"  and  that 
all  Scripture  is  given  by  inspiration  of  God.  This 
divine  "  moving  "  would  seem  to  have  been  that 
quickening  impulse  which  involved  revelation  of 
truth,  or  illumination  of  truth,  or  sympathetic  ap- 
preciation of  truth,  as  the  man  was  given  the 
vision  according  to  the  Holy  Spirit's  purpose. 
But  it  is  evident  that  while  these  writers  were 
inspired  of  God,  they  betray  the  marks  of  hu- 
man conditions  and  limitations.  We  have  noted 
in  a  former  chapter  that  all  revelation  has  borne 
distinctive  evidence  of  being  accommodated  to 
the  finite  weaknesses  of  men.  Old  Testament 
teaching  was  not  as  full  or  final  as  that  of  the 
New  Testament,  because  men  were  not  ready  to 
receive  it.  At  the  earliest  possible  moment  it 
appears  that  God  gave  to  men  clearer  visions  and 
higher  standards,  according  as  they  were  ready 
for  them. 

When  we  take  a  closer  inspection  of  the  book, 
we  find  it  to  consist  of  various  kinds  of  material, 
historical,  poetica,  prophetical,  ethical  and  re- 
ligious. Moreover  some  of  this  material  is  mani- 
festly intended  to  be  given  as  according  to  the 
will  of  God,  while  some  of  it  is  not.  For  in- 
stance, much  that  men  said  and  did  was  contrary 
to  the  will  of  God.  The  devil's  lies  are  here  re- 
corded.   The  arguments  of  Job's  would-be  com- 


The  Problem  of  Inspiration        253 

forters  are  here.  They  have  been  supposed  to 
be  inspired  of  God  simply  because  they  are 
in  the  Bible;  but  God  repudiated  them  as  not 
acceptable  to  Him.  It  is  evident,  therefore,  that 
much  in  the  Bible  is  not  inspired  of  God.  The 
record  of  it  is  reliable,  and  its  lesson  is  evi- 
dent; but  the  words  themselves  are  not  in- 
spired as  truth,  for  they  are  not  truth.  It  fur- 
ther appears  that  all  parts  of  the  record  are  not 
of  equal  importance.  The  Westminster  symbol 
points  out  this  fact  thus :  "  All  things  in  Scrip- 
ture are  not  alike  plain  in  themselves,  nor  alike 
clear  unto  all;  yet  those  things  which  are  nec- 
essary to  be  known,  believed  and  observed  for 
salvation  are  so  clearly  propounded  and  opened 
in  some  place  of  Scripture  or  other,  that  not  only 
the  learned,  but  the  unlearned,  in  a  due  use  of 
the  ordinary  means,  may  attain  unto  a  sufficient 
understanding  of  them." 

The  meaning  of  this  is  evident.  While  all 
Scripture  is  given  by  inspiration  of  God,  some 
parts  of  the  Bible  are  more  necessary  than 
others  to  a  knowledge  of  the  way  of  salva- 
tion. Every  part  of  it  is  profitable,  (the  ac- 
counts of  man's  failures  as  well  as  his  obedi- 
ences), and  fills  out  the  record  of  God's  revela- 
tion to  and  dealings  with  men.  Yet  some  of 
the  teachings  herein  recorded  are  fundamental, 
while  others  are  secondary  and  incidental.  It 
logically  follows  that  it  has  been  more  impor- 
tant to  preserve  the  fundamental  truths  of  the 


254    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

Bible  than  to  preserve  every  word  and  letter  that 
has  been  written.  That  is  to  say,  the  work  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  who  moved  men  to  write  this  record, 
has  all  along  involved  the  preservation  of  the 
vital  truth,  committed  as  it  has  been  to  human 
hands  through  the  centuries. 

Men  sometimes  ask  if  it  be  of  vital  importance 
that  every  word  and  syllable  of  this  record  shall 
be  preserved  as  the  original  writing  came  from 
the  hands  of  those  who  produced  it.  The  answer 
is  found  in  the  fact  that  we  have  some  fourteen 
hundred  manuscripts  of  the  Bible,  and  no  two 
of  them  exactly  alike.  The  only  possible  mean- 
ing of  this  fact  is  that  God  has  not  been  concerned 
about  preserving  the  record  from  the  marks  of 
human  imperfection  in  its  transmission.  Let  it 
be  noted  that  the  differences  are  relatively  in- 
significant, and  that  all  these  manuscripts  agree 
in  the  vital  truth.  It  follows  that  while  the  facts 
teach  us  not  to  swear  by  the  letter  which  killeth, 
we  are  to  realize  that  the  Spirit  of  the  truth, 
which  giveth  life,  breathes  in  all  the  various 
copies  of  the  Scriptures  from  the  beginning  until 
now.  New  Testament  writers  generally  are  not 
careful  to  quote  Old  Testament  passages  verba- 
tim; but  are  content  to  give  the  real  meaning  of 
the  words  to  which  they  refer. 

The  question  as  to  whether  the  existing 
discrepancies  were  in  the  original  text,  or 
crept  in  at  the  hands  of  copyists  and  com- 
mentators,  can   never   be   answered.    The  orig- 


The  Problem  of  Inspiration        255 

inal  manuscripts  are  beyond  our  reach.  The 
validity  of  inspiration  cannot  be  impugned  by 
any  theory  about  the  original  autographs.  God 
evidently  deems  the  Bible  as  we  now  have  it 
sufficiently  pure  for  His  purpose.  Every  day  its 
sufficiency  is  demonstrated  among  all  sorts  and 
conditions  of  men.  Here  we  rest  in  the  confi- 
dence that  we  need  not  theorize  about  original 
manuscripts.  If  the  present  text  is  sufficient,  an 
original  text  like  unto  it  would  be  equally  suf- 
ficient. We  have  suggested  in  former  chapters 
the  probable  way  in  which  inaccuracies  have 
crept  in  at  the  hands  of  copyists  and  later  com- 
mentators, and  such  considerations  justify  the 
opinion  that  the  original  writings  were  more  free 
from  error  than  those  we  have.  And  yet  it  is  not 
essential  that  it  should  have  been  so.  God  has 
used  fallible  men  to  give  us  the  infallible  truth  in 
the  setting  of  human  limitations.  The  infallible 
truth  is  not  lost  thereby. 

The  whole  record  carries  an  atmosphere  of  re- 
liability in  its  spirit  and  method  of  witnessing  to 
the  truth.  Paul  writes  in  i  Cor.  ii:  12-13,  **  We 
have  received  not  the  spirit  of  the  world,  but  the 
spirit  which  is  of  God,  which  things  also  we 
speak,  not  in  the  words  which  man's  wisdom 
teacheth,  but  which  the  Holy  Ghost  teacheth." 
Archdeacon  Farrar  says  Paul's  view  of  inspira- 
tion led  him  to  make  "  the  words  of  Scripture 
co-extensive  and  identical  with  the  words  of 
God,"  and  that  "  the  controversial  use  which  he 


256    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

makes  of  Old  Testament  passages  attaches  con- 
sequences of  the  deepest  importance  to  what  an 
ordinary  reader  might  regard  as  a  mere  gram- 
matical expression."  The  illustration  which  he 
cites  is  the  familiar  reference  of  the  apostle  in 
Gal.  iii :  16,  v/here  Paul  argues  from  the  singular 
rather  than  the  plural  form  of  the  word  "  seed  " 
in  God's  promise  to  Abraham.  So  when  Christ 
says :  "  It  is  written,"  the  reader  does  not  dis- 
tinguish the  particular  utterance  as  more  ac- 
curate than  any  other,  but  recognizes  the  force  of 
the  teaching  to  be  an  endorsement  of  the  divine 
authority  that  rests  in  all  the  Old  Testament. 
We  are  taught  in  2  Pet.  i :  19-21,  that  "  we  have 
also  a  more  sure  word  of  prophecy,  whereunto 
ye  do  well  that  ye  take  heed,  as  unto  a  light  that 
shineth  in  a  dark  place,  .  .  .  knowing  this 
first  that  no  prophecy  of  the  Scripture  is  of  any 
private  interpretation.  For  the  prophecy  came 
not  in  the  old  time  by  the  will  of  man ;  but  holy 
men  of  God  spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the 
Holy  Ghost." 

In  this  connection  attention  should  be  called  to 
one  of  the  most  significant  facts  in  all  Bible 
study.  The  important  words  in  a  sentence,  which 
we  may  call  the  truth-burdened  words,  and  which 
are  found  in  all  manuscripts  alike,  are  the  words 
which  the  Bible  student  examines  with  special 
care.  Our  libraries  are  filled  with  the  commen- 
taries of  the  centuries,  and  the  main  object  of 
these  comments  is  to  teach  us  that  these  vitally 


The  Problem  of  Inspiration        257 

important  words  have  a  certain  colour  of  mean- 
ing, a  certain  phase  of  significance,  a  certain  deli- 
cate shade  of  truth,  which  men  must  understand 
in  order  to  appreciate  the  exact  mind  of  the  Spirit 
of  God  in  the  teaching  considered.  Thus  the 
great  argument  made  by  every  commentator  who 
ever  published  a  book  has  pointed  to  the  fact  that 
the  Holy  Spirit,  again  and  again,  has  conveyed 
to  us  a  meaning  so  precise  and  so  distinctive  that 
no  other  word  known  to  man  will  convey  the 
truth  so  well  as  the  one  word  which  the  men  who 
wrote  the  message  were  inspired  to  use.  Keep- 
ing this  fact  in  mind,  we  shall  be  helped  in  the 
practical  appreciation  of  the  great  work  of  in- 
spiration as  it  preserves  for  us  the  revelation  of 
God. 

Having  these  considerations  in  mind,  having 
also  in  mind  those  facts  noted  in  the  progress  of 
our  studies,  in  former  chapters,  regarding  dis- 
crepancies in  the  text,  having  furthermore  in 
mind  the  discussion  regarding  the  divine  au- 
thority in  the  Scriptures  considered  in  the  pre- 
ceding chapter,  we  ask  ourselves  what  sort  of 
definition  of  inspiration  is  possible  which  will 
adequately  set  forth  the  real  character  of  the 
Bible  as  the  word  of  God  and  the  infallible  rule 
of  faith  and  life  for  men?  The  most  helpful 
discussion  of  the  subject  will  be  found  in  the 
book  of  Dr.  DeWitt  already  mentioned.  No  dif- 
ficulty is  evaded,  no  discrepancy  is  denied,  no 
moral  blemish,  as  determined    by    our    present 


258    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

standards,  is  overlooked;  but  every  difficulty  is 
carefully  and  frankly  considered,  and  every  part 
of  the  book  is  given  its  proper  relation  to  the 
whole. 

Dr.  DeWitt's  key  to  the  whole  problem  is 
found  in  the  definition  of  revelation,  in  un- 
folding which  he  discovers  the  real  character  of 
inspiration.  He  considers  revelation  from  the 
standpoint  of  three  questions :  "  What  is  re- 
vealed ?  To  whom  is  it  revealed  ?  and  With  what 
design  ?  "  To  the  first  question  he  answers  : 
"  The  Bible  throughout  its  whole  extent  reveals 
God — the  living  God."  This  revelation  is  not 
in  the  abstract  form  of  philosophic  thought,  but 
"  in  voluntary  relations  with  men,  as  a  wise, 
righteous,  and  almighty  moral  Governor,  a 
loving  Father,  and  a  gracious  Saviour."  .  .  . 
"  The  Revealer  is  Himself  the  revelation.  No 
attribute  of  His  nature  is  more  strongly  marked 
than  that  which  is  described  by  the  adjective 
self-revealing.  He  is  always  manifesting  Himself 
in  aspects  important  to  men.  This  was  the  light 
shining  in  darkness  from  the  beginning." 

Now  this  revelation  was  first  of  all  to  the 
prophet,  and  through  the  prophet  to  the  people. 
The  prophet  was  only  partially  receptive  to  the 
divine  truth,  and  the  people  were  much  more  ig- 
norant than  he.  He  took  in  what  he  could,  and 
gave  the  people  the  best  he  had.  "  He  saw  ob- 
scurely, but  he  saw.  Degraded  heathendom  must 
receive  some  glimpse  of  a  higher  divinity  than 


The  Problem  of  Inspiration        259 

ever  before  recognized — a  living  God,  a  spiritual 
God,  a  personal  God,  a  holy  God;  one  that  can 
see,  hear,  speak,  promise,  threaten,  reward,  pun- 
ish, projecting  Himself  into  the  life  and  history  of 
men,  so  far  as  they  were  capable  of  apprehend- 
ing Him." 

When  he  tells  us  the  purpose  of  this  revela- 
tion. Dr.  DeWitt  declares  it  to  be  "  the  produc- 
tion of  a  perfect  humanity."  DeaHng  with  the 
moral  blemishes  in  the  Old  Testament  records, 
he  follows  the  thought  of  Canon  Mozley  in  as- 
serting that  "  a  religion  from  God,  embodying 
the  highest  conception,  and  opening  up  before 
men  a  glorious  future  of  knowledge,  purity,  love, 
and  blessedness  in  divine  fellowship,  must  be  re- 
vealed progressively.  If  it  had  been  at  once  pro- 
claimed in  its  higher  and  purer  form,  men  in 
their  moral  darkness  and  degradation  could  not 
have  received  it.  It  must  come  to  them  through 
their  own  moral  atmosphere,  and  modified  by  its 
obstructions,  misapprehensions,  and  confusion  on 
all  ethical  questions.  It  could  only  be  appre- 
hended gradually,  as  accommodated  to  the  pre- 
possessions which  must  for  an  indefinite  time 
shut  out  the  perfected  and  absolute  truth  and 
right.  So  modified,  it  might  by  degrees  effect  a 
moral  transformation,  rectify  unworthy  concep- 
tions of  God,  elevate  the  ethical  standard,  and 
lift  the  race  to  a  higher  plane.  From  this  vantage 
ground  a  fresh  revelation  of  justice,  holiness,  and 
love  of  God  as  crystallized  in  a  perfect  man,  the 


26o    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

representative  head  of  redeemed  humanity,  could 
be  apprehended,  appreciated,  embraced,  and  ab- 
sorbed, and  thus  the  whole  mass  should  be 
changed  into  the  image  of  God  in  all  moral  per- 
fections." 

This  view  recognizes  a  mixture  of  the 
true  and  false,  and  a  temporary  accommo- 
dation in  matters  of  justice,  love,  and  truth  to 
the  infirmities  of  men.  This  process  is  justified 
because  it  is  looking  forward  and  upward  all 
the  time.  Christ  said  it  was  for  the  hardness  of 
men's  hearts  that  Moses  allowed  that  which  was 
not  pleasing  to  God.  The  Lord  Himself  now 
lifts  men  to  the  higher  level.  A  progressive  rev- 
elation must  be  judged  by  its  end.  Human  na- 
ture makes  it  inevitable,  and  human  progress  in 
its  light  is  its  vindication. 

After  showing  how  the  fulness  of  the  perfect 
revelation  is  in  Jesus  Christ,  Dr.  DeWitt  gives 
us  the  following  definition  of  inspiration :  "  In- 
spiration is  a  special  energy  of  the  Spirit  of  God 
upon  the  mind  and  heart  of  selected  and  pre- 
pared human  agents  which  does  not  obstruct  nor 
impair  their  native  and  normal  activities,  nor  mi- 
raculously enlarge  the  boundaries  of  their  knowl- 
edge, except  where  essential  to  the  inspiring  pur- 
pose ;  but  stimulates  and  assists  them  to  the  clear 
discernment  and  faithful  utterance  of  truth  and 
fact,  and  when  necessary  brings  within  their 
range  truth  or  fact  which  could  not  otherwise 
have  been  known.     By  such  direction  and  aid, 


The  Problem  of  Inspiration        261 

through  spoken  or  written  words,  in  combination 
with  any  divinely  ordered  circumstances  with 
which  they  may  be  historically  interwoven,  the 
result  contemplated  in  the  purpose  of  God  is 
realized  in  a  progressive  revelation  of  His  wis- 
dom, righteousness,  and  grace  for  the  instruction 
and  moral  education  of  men. 

"  The  revelation  so  produced  is  perma- 
nent and  infallible  for  all  matters  of  faith 
and  practice;  except  so  far  as  any  given 
revelation  may  be  manifestly  partial,  pro- 
visional, and  limited  in  its  time  and  condi- 
tions, or  may  be  afterwards  modified  or  super- 
seded by  a  higher  and  fuller  revelation,  adapted 
to  an  advanced  period  in  the  redemptive  process 
to  which  all  revelation  relates  as  its  final  end  and 
glorious  consummation.  No  proposed  definition 
of  God's  inspiring  grace  can  be  accepted  as  com- 
plete unless  it  has  been  formulated  ( i )  in  the  light 
of  the  grand  central  truth  in  which  inspiration  and 
revelation  alike  culminate,  that  Jesus  Christ  as  a 
person,  '  the  only-begotten  of  the  Father,'  is  the 
final,  perfect,  and  the  only  perfect  revelation  of 
God  to  men;  and  (2)  with  due  regard  to  the 
radical  difference  between  the  words  of  Christ, 
who  is  Himself  the  truth,  and  those  of  all  inspired 
teachers,  as  between  the  primary  and  every  sec- 
ondary source  of  divine  knowledge  and  author- 
ity. All  historic,  prophetic,  and  didactic  revela- 
tion of  God  in  the  inspired  Books  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testament,  is  inferior  and  subordinate  to 


262    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

His  revelation  of  personal  truth  and  grace  in  the 
Christ  of  the  historic  Gospels;  and  whatsoever 
the  former  may  contain  that  is  incongruous 
therewith,  whatever  be  the  explanation  of  its  in- 
congruity, is  not  to  be  held  as  authoritative  for 
us,  but  is  virtually  superseded,  as  an  imperfect 
and  provisional  inspiration." 

Such  is  the  definition  which  is  quoted  in  full 
as  one  than  which  it  would  be  difficult  to  produce 
a  better.  It  gathers  up  into  itself  those  state- 
ments about  all  the  perplexing  problems  which 
are  relevant,  and  discriminates  each  one  in  a 
most  effective  manner.  Let  men  determine  their 
conception  of  the  Bible  in  the  light  of  this  defi- 
nition, and  old-time  difficulties  will  disappear,  and 
the  clear-shining  truth  will  become  increasingly 
luminous.  Approaching  thus  to  Christ  as  the 
final  Teacher  of  the  truth,  we  repeat  our  confi- 
dence concerning  the  increase  of  His  authority 
in  the  minds  and  hearts  of  men,  because  we  be- 
hold the  growing  number  of  His  faithful  fol- 
lowers seeing  eye  to  eye  more  clearly,  and  more 
earnestly  following  His  will.  In  the  highest  and 
truest  sense,  therefore,  men  are  finding  this  Bible 
to  be  the  inspired  word  of  God,  the  only  infal- 
lible rule  of  faith  and  life,  now  and  for  all  time. 


XXX 

•THE  ABIDING  WORD  OF  GOD 

WE  have  noted  the  movement  of  modern 
Criticism  through  about  two  hundred 
years.  In  many  of  the  great  centres 
of  human  learning  the  Bible  has  been  cast  aside 
in  unbelief.  Men  who  have  been  counted  pro- 
ficient in  human  wisdom  have  never  learned  that 
"  all  the  treasures  of  wisdom  and  knowledge  " 
are  found  in  Jesus  Christ.  Yet  during  these  same 
two  centuries  wonderful  streams  of  life  have 
flowed  out  to  the  world  from  this  Bible.  Out  of 
Germany  came  the  Moravians  carrying  the  light 
of  life  to  men  dying  in  the  darkness  of  sin.  Out 
of  Great  Britain  and  America  went  the  mission- 
ary movements  which  girdle  the  earth  to-day  with 
lines  of  light  and  blessing.  Within  these  cen- 
turies the  great  Bible  Societies  of  Christendom 
have  sent  out  millions  of  copies  of  the  Scriptures, 
without  note  or  comment,  and  immortal  souls 
have  been  saved  unto  God  through  the  instru- 
mentality of  the  inspired  Word.  Never  in  all  the 
years  was  the  Bible  so  evidently  the  power  of 
God  and  the  wisdom  of  God  unto  the  salvation 
of  men. 

There  are  many  instances  recorded  of  the  sav- 
263 


264    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

ing  power  of  the  truth,  but  none  more  remark- 
able than  the  following  has  come  to  the  writer*s 
knowledge.  Recently  the  Rev.  Eugene  P.  Dun- 
lap,  D.D.,  of  Bangkok,  Siam,  a  missionary  in  that 
country  for  twenty-five  years  under  the  Presby- 
terian Board,  and  a  man  most  highly  honoured 
by  all  who  know  him,  related  this  incident  in 
New  York  City.  A  few  years  ago  Dr.  Dunlap 
learned  that  the  Lieutenant  Governor  of  one  of 
the  provinces  in  the  Malay  Peninsula  was  a 
Christian  believer,  though  the  man  had  never 
met  a  Christian  before  his  conversion.  Dr.  Dun- 
lap  sought  him  out,  was  welcomed  with  the  ex- 
clamation— "  Hosanna !  "  and  heard  from  the 
man's  own  lips  the  remarkable  story  of  his  life. 
At  the  age  of  forty  he  was  still  a  worshipper  of 
idols,  but  at  that  time,  while  engaged  in  making 
some  new  idols  with  his  own  hands,  he  stopped 
in  his  work  to  ponder  the  wonderful  structure  of 
the  human  hand,  with  its  capacities  and  power. 
Then  the  thought  widened  to  the  appreciation  of 
the  creative  power  in  the  universe.  Calling  his 
wife,  they  reasoned  together  and  agreed  that  it 
was  folly  to  worship  the  creatures  of  their  own 
hands. 

Gathering  together  their  idols,  they  destroyed 
all  of  them,  and  returning  to  the  room  which  had 
long  been  set  apart  as  a  place  of  worship,  they 
asked  themselves  what  or  whom  they  should  wor- 
ship. Reasoning  along  the  line  of  their  new  con- 
victions,   these     new    worshippers     determined 


The  Abiding  Word  of  God        265 

henceforth  to  give  the  allegiance  of  their  souls  to 
The  Greatest  in  the  Universe,  and  for  thirty  years 
they  entered  daily  into  their  sanctuary  and  wor- 
shipped Him,  of  whom  Paul  writes :  "  The  in- 
visible things  of  God  from  the  creation  of  the 
world  are  clearly  seen,  being  understood  by  the 
things  that  are  made,  even  his  eternal  power  and 
Godhead."  With  sincere  hearts  they  strove  to 
do  that  which  was  in  keeping  with  the  law  writ- 
ten upon  their  hearts,  all  the  time  longing  for 
more  light  which  would  give  them  intelligent 
and  adequate  conceptions  of  the  unknown  God. 
They  were  "  without  excuse  "  regarding  idolatry, 
but  they  did  not  yet  know  God  as  God  would 
have  men  know  Him. 

The  allotted  threescore  years  and  ten  were 
spent,  but  at  the  age  of  seventy  years  he 
heard  of  a  man  who  was  selling  a  wonder- 
ful book  said  to  contain  the  truth.  Im- 
pelled by  a  strange  confidence,  he  sought  out  this 
man  and  asked  about  the  character  of  the  book. 
For  reply  he  was  told  it  revealed  The  Greatest 
Being  in  the  Universe  to  men.  "  Ah !  "  he  ex- 
claimed, "  I  want  that  book !  "  Hurrying  to  his 
home,  he  sat  down  with  his  wife  on  the  very 
verandah  where  Dr.  Dunlap  heard  his  story,  and 
together  they  read  the  book  from  the  beginning 
to  the  end,  day  after  day.  When  they  came  to 
the  record  of  Paul's  address  at  Mars  Hill,  he 
said :  "  Wife,  we  have  been  In  Athens  for  these 
thirty  years !  "    The  knowledge  of  God  in  all  the 


266    Bible  Criticism  and  the  Average  Man 

fulness  of  the  revelation  which  culminates  in 
Christ  flooded  their  souls  with  an  unspeakable 
joy. 

When  the  old  man  finished  his  story,  he 
opened  a  silver  box  on  the  table,  and  took  from 
it  a  paper  which  was  much  worn,  and  said : 
"  Here  is  my  faith.  People  ask  me  what  I  be- 
lieve, and  I  have  written  it  out  on  this  paper." 
With  profound  interest.  Dr.  Dunlap  took  the 
statement  to  discover  what  would  be  the  faith  of 
a  man,  with  nothing  but  the  open  Bible  in  his 
hand,  and  the  guidance  of  the  Spirit  of  God.  The 
paper  contained  every  vital  essential  to  the  Evan- 
gelical Christian  faith.  The  Lieutenant  Gover- 
nor and  his  wife  had  been  living  in  exact  accord 
with  the  teachings  of  the  New  Testament,  joyful 
Christians,  and  faithful  witnesses  for  Christ  to 
their  fellow-men.  For  the  people  round  about 
him  the  Old  Testament  reflected  their  moral 
status,  in  its  descriptions  of  the  idolatrous  na- 
tions in  Israel's  time.  But  for  himself,  as  he 
moved  through  the  Old  Testament,  finding  it 
quite  up  to  date  for  most  of  the  people  of  Siam 
in  its  restrictions,  he  followed  the  hope  of  Israel 
into  the  New  Testament  fulfillment,  and  found 
the  old  and  partial  superseded  and  filled  full  in 
the  new  and  completed  revelation  of  God  and  His 
will  in  Jesus  Christ. 

This  is  our  Bible,  and  sufficient  "  lamp 
to  our  feet,  and  light  to  our  path."  Says 
Dr.  DeWitt :  "  It   sweeps  over  the  vast  spaces 


The  Abiding  Word  of  God        267 

that  separate  us  from  man's  first  existence 
upon  the  earth.  No  subtle  illusions,  no  ingenious 
sophistries,  no  artful  disguises  that  error  or 
wickedness  may  assume,  no  fog-banks  of  false- 
hood and  wrong  can  withstand  its  penetrative 
gleam.  This  light  of  life  illumines  all  history. 
It  tests  all  that  the  busy  brain  of  man  has  con- 
ceived, or  his  hands  have  wrought.  It  is  '  living 
and  powerful,  and  sharper  than  any  two-edged 
sword,  and  piercing  to  the  dividing  asunder  of 
soul  and  spirit,  of  both  the  joints  and  the  marrow, 
and  quick  to  discern  the  thoughts  and  intents  of 
the  heart.'  "  As  it  proved  the  Bread  of  Life  to 
the  nobleman  of  Siam,  so  it  is  proving  to  be  to 
thousands  of  men  in  every  land  and  clime.  Now 
as  ever,  the  secret  of  all  regeneration  and  the 
progress  of  all  redemption  is  in  the  fact  that  men 
are  "  being  born  again,  not  of  corruptible  seed, 
but  of  incorruptible,  by  the  word  of  God,  which 
liveth  and  abideth  forever." 


Index 


Abbott,  E.  A.,  on  the  Gos- 
pels, 165. 

Abbott,  Ezra,  on  the  Gnos- 
tic's acceptance  of  John's 
Gospel,  219. 

Acts  of  the  Apostles,  The, 
171 ;  Lukan  authorship 
of,    171 ;     McGiffert    on, 

Adam,  the  historic,  93. 

Addis  on  Staerk,  23. 

Akkadian  record  of  the 
flood,  78. 

Allegory  in  Genesis,  93 ;  in 
the  prophets,  160;  in  the 
book  of  Revelation,  230. 

Amarna,  Tel  el,  tablets  of, 

74. 

Ambrose  on  the  Psalms, 
142. 

Amos,  the  book  of,  156; 
unity  of,  157. 

Antiquity  of  man,  92. 

Alford,  Dean,  on  2  Thess., 
192. 

Apocalypse,  as  distin- 
guished from  prophecy, 
153. 

Astruc  on  the  Mosaic  au- 
thorship of  Genesis,  55. 

Atonement,  theories  of  the, 
248. 

Average  man,  the,  21. 

Babylonian  script  in  use 
in  earlv  history  of  Ca- 
naan, 74. 


Balaam,  episode  of,  109. 
Baruch,  the  book  of,  155. 
Bauer's    influence    on    the 

critical  movement,  163. 
Beecher,  W.  J.,  on  expert 

authority,  22. 
Beecher,    H.    W.,    on    the 

twenty-third  Psalm,  143. 
Bible,  the,  26;    explanation 

of  unique  character,  27 ; 

its    influence    increasing, 

29 ;  Geo.  Adam  Smith  on, 

47- 

Bissell,  E.  C.,  on  Genesis  in 
Colours,  62. 

Blackie,  J.  S.,  on  Wolfian 
theory  about  Homer,  27. 

Blass  on  the  Acts.  173. 

Bleek  on  the  Pentateuch, 
59,  86;  on  Numbers,  no. 

Bliss,  the  discoveries  of,  75. 

Book  of  the  Origins,  the, 
60. 

Briggs,  C.  A.,  on  Criticism, 
355;  on  the  Mosaic  au- 
thorship of  the  Penta- 
teuch, 81. 

Brown,  Francis,  on  the  su- 
periority of  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures,  70 ;  article  on 
Chronicles,  130. 

Bruce  on  the  Gospels,  166; 
on  the  validity  of  the 
Gospel  miracles,  236, 

Brugsch  Bey  on  the  accu- 
rate Egyptology  of  the 
Pentateuch,  78. 


269 


ayo 


Index 


Calvin  on  the  Psalms,  143. 

Canon  of  Scripture,  and  the 
New   Testament,   181 

Chaucer's  vocabulary  illus- 
trative of  Daniel's,  154. 

Cheyne  on  the  critical  im- 
agination, 6S ;  on  Isaiah, 
149;  on  Micah,  158. 

Christ  and  the  Critics,  240; 
on  Old  Testament  writ- 
ings, 240;  distinctive  au- 
thority of,  242 ;  His  char- 
acter portrayed,  not  de- 
scribed, 163  ;  the  place  of 
miracles  defined  by,  235. 

Christian  critics  to  be  hon- 
oured, 44. 

Chronicles,  the  books  of, 
127,  130. 

Chronology  in  Genesis,  92. 

Church,  Dean,  on  Criti- 
cism's output,  63. 

Clement  of  Rome  on  2 
Peter,  185. 

Clement  of  Alexandria  on 
Hebrews,  210;  on  John's 
banishment,  229, 

Code  of  the  Covenant,  the, 
61 ;  the  Deuteronomic, 
61 ;  the  Levitical,  62. 

Cook,  Canon,  on  Egyptol- 
ogy in  Exodus,  98. 

Coleridge  on  the  Bible,  27. 

Colossians,  epistle  to  the, 
197,  .198. 

Colossian  heresy,  the,  198. 

Confidence,  a  lesson  in,  41. 

Conservative  critics  should 
be  recognized,  52,  53. 

Corinthians,  First  Epistle 
to  the,  193 ;  Second  Epis- 
tle to  the,  193. 

Credibility  of  the  Scripture 
records,  250. 

Critics  over  confident,  24. 

Critic,  The,  in  the  discus- 


sion of  Thackeray's  pa- 
pers, 38  sa. 

Critical  imagination,  the, 
68. 

Criticism  proper,  32;  a 
precarious  science  at  best, 

39- 
Crystallization  theory,  the, 

59- 

Dagon,  the  fish  god  of 
Nineveh,  234. 

Daniel,  the  book  of,  153  sq. 

David's  life  and  work,  127. 

Deuteronomic  code,  the,  61. 

Deuteronomy,  the  book  of, 
113;  theories  as  to  au- 
thorship, 114  sq. 

Development,  theory,  the, 
61. 

De  Wette  on  the  Penta- 
teuch, 57,  59;  on  Num- 
bers, 107. 

De  Witt  on  Inspiration,  247 
sq.,  257  sq. 

Disagreement  among  the 
critics,  68,  97, 

Discrepancies,  actual  and 
alleged,  132. 

Document  theory,  the,  53. 

Dods,  Marcus,  on  John's 
Gospel,  217,  223,  225. 

Domitian's  persecution,  229. 

Double  narrative  in  Gene- 
sis, 56. 

Driver,  Canon,  on  Leviti- 
cus, loi ;  on  Isaiah,  14S 
sq. 

Dunlap,  E.  P.,  on  the  suffi- 
ciency of  the  Bible,  264. 

Ebed  Tob,  of  Jerusalem,  74. 

Ecclesiastes,  the  book  of, 
143. 

Egyptology  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, 77. 


Index 


271 


Eichorn  on  the  Pentateuch. 

55. 

Elohist,  the,  and  the  Jeho- 
vist.  56, 

EncyclopccdiaBihlica,  warn- 
ing against,  164. 

Ephesians,  the  Epistle  to 
the,  200. 

Erman  on  the  culture  of  the 
early  Syrians,  y6. 

Evangelical  faith  cannot  be 
shaken,  162. 

Evans,  L.  J.,  on  dangers  of 
criticism,  69. 

Ewald's  theory  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch, 60;  on  the  unity 
of  Job,    141 ;     on   Isaiah, 

145. 
Eusebius    on    Papias,    166; 

on  2  Peter,  185 ;    on  the 

Pastoral  Epistles,  203. 
Exodus,   the  book   of,   95 ; 

the  purpose  of,  95. 
Ezekiel,  the  book  of,  152. 

Fairbairn,  Principal,^  on 
Criticism,  34 ;  on  Christ's 
life,  164;  on  the  articles 
of  Abbott  and  Schmiedel 
in  the  Enc.  Biblica,  166. 

Farrar,  Archdeacon,  on  the 
Critics,  62;  on  theories 
about  Daniel,  154;  on 
Paul's  conception  of  in- 
spiration, 255. 

Fragment  theory,  the,  57. 

Froude  on  Job,  27,  141. 

Galatians,  the  Epistle  to 
the,  192. 

Geike    on    the    ark   of   th6 

covenant,  137. 
Genesis  in  colours,  89;    the 

book  of.  88:    plan  of.  89. 
Gesenius    on    the    superior 

literary  character  of  the 


Pentateuch,  as  compared 
with  post-exilic  writings, 
91. 

Gibeah  and  the  Tabernacle, 
13S. 

Gladstone  on  various  tests 
of  the  value  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. 25  :  on  the  Wolfian 
theory  about  Homer,  37. 

Gloag,  P.  J.,  on  the  Pas- 
toral Epistles.  206. 

Goethe  on  the  Bible,  26. 

Gospels,  the  synoptic,  162. 

Graf's  theory  of  tne  Penta- 
teuch, 61, 

Gramberg  on  the  Penta- 
teuch, 55. 

Grant,  U.  S.,  on  the  Bible, 
26. 

Green,  W.  H.,  on  the  frag- 
ment theory,  57. 

Gregory.  D.  S.,  on  the  four 
Gospels,  168. 

Habakkuk,  the  book  of, 
156. 

Haggai,  the  book  of,  156. 

Harnack  on  John,  221 ;  on 
the  miracles,  237. 

Harper,  W.  R.,  on  super- 
iority of  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures,  71. 

Hartmann    on    Pentateuch, 

57-  _.    . 

Hastings       Dictionary      of 

the  Bible,  130. 

Hawkins,  J.,   on  the  Act^, 

Hebrews,  the  Epistle  to  the, 
208. 

Hengstenberg  on  the  au- 
thenticity of  the  Penta- 
teuch, 86. 

Herschel  on  the  Bible,  26. 

Hesy,  Tel  el,  tablets,  75. 

Hexateuch,  the,  119. 


272 


Index 


Historic  Christianity,  250. 

Hobbes,  Thomas,  on  Mosaic 
Authorship,  54. 

Homer,  critical  theories 
about,  36  sq. 

Honour  to  honourable  crit- 
ics, 46. 

Hosea.  the  book  of,  156, 
158. 

Hughes,  J.  S.,  on  the  book 
of  Revelation,  231. 

Hupfeld's  theory  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch, 60. 

Illgen  on  the  Pentateuch, 

55. 
Inspiration,  the  problem  of, 

247. 

Irenaeus  on  John's  Gospel, 
219;  on  the  book  of  Rev- 
elation, 229. 

Isaiah,  the  book  of,  145. 

James,  the  Epistle  of,  182. 
Jasher,  the  book  of,  120. 
Jehovist  and  Elohist,  56. 
Jeremiah,  the  book  of,  151. 
Jerome   on   the    Epistle   to 

the  Hebrews,  210. 
Job,  the  book  of,  141. 
Joel,  the  book  of,  156. 
John's  writings,  216. 
John's  banishment,  228. 
Jonah    and    miracles,    234; 

the  book  of,  159. 
Joshua,   the  book  of,   119; 

his  relation  to  Moses,  122 ; 

Ewald    and    Knobel    on, 

121. 
Jowett  on  I  Thes.  190. 
Judaistic    tendency    in    the 

early  Church,  176,  192. 
Jude,  the  Epistle  of,  188. 
Judges,   the   book   of,    124; 

silent  about  the  TalDerna- 

cle,  125. 


Justin  Martyr  on  the  book 
of  Revelation,  226. 

Kalish  on  Exodus,  95. 

Kant  on  the  Gospels,  26. 

Keil  on  Numbers,  108. 

Kindergarten  age  of  the 
race,  233. 

King,  H.  C,  definition  ol 
Criticism,  33 ;  on  distinc- 
tions as  to  Criticism,  70; 
on  a  simpler  theory  of  the 
composition  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, 122. 

Kings,  the  books  of,  129. 

Knobel  on  the  Pentateuch, 

59. 

Koppe  on  Isaiah,  145. 

Kuenen  on  the  Pentateuch, 
61 ;  on  the  time  of  its 
compilation,  84 ;  differs 
from  other  critics,  22. 

Lachish  discovered,  75- 
Lamentations,  the  book  of, 

144: 
Levitical  code,  62. 
Leviticus,  the  book  of,  100 ; 

tokens    of    early    origin, 

102. 
Liberal  Christian  critics  to 

be  recognized,  47. 
Liberty  in  research  desired, 

23. 
Lightfoot  on  the  Epistle  to 

the  Philippians,  202. 
Literary    activity    in    early 

Canaan,  74. 
Literary  Criticism,  32. 
Logia  of  Jesus,  166. 
Luke's    Gospel,    167,    169; 

Lukan      authorship      of 

Acts,  171  sq. 
Luther    on    the    Epistle   to 

the  Hebrews,  210. 


Index 


273 


Major  prophets,  i45- 
Malachi,  the  book  of,  156. 
Manuscripts,^   the    original, 

of  the  Scriptures,  254. 
Marcion  on  John's  Gospel, 

219. 
Margoliouth  on  Isaiah,  147 

sq. 
Mark's  Gospel,  169. 
Matthew's  Gospel,  168. 
Mead,  C.  M.,  on  Criticism, 

32. 
Micah,    the   book    of,    156, 

158. 

Minor  Prophets,  156. 

Miracles,  the  place  of,  232; 
the  philosophy  of,  233; 
G.  A.  Smith  on,  48;  in 
the  Gospels,  Dods  on, 
222;   Bruce  on,  236. 

Modified  Document  Theory, 
60. 

Monuments,  facts  from  the, 

73- 

Moravians,  the,  263. 

Mosaic  authorship  of  the 
Pentateuch,   54  sq.,  84. 

Moses,  the  historic,  81 ;  and 
the  authorship  of  Genesis, 
56:  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  215. 

Mozley,  Canon,  on  pro- 
gressive revelation,  259. 

Muratorian  Canon,  the,  205. 

McGiflFert,  A.  C,  his  book 
The  Apostolic  Age,  51; 
on  the  Gospels,  167;  on 
the  Acts,  171 ;  on  Paul, 
177  sq. ;  on  the  Epistle  of 
James,  182;  on  the  clos- 
ing chapters  of  the  Epis- 
tle to  the  Romans,  195; 
on  the  Epistle  to  the  Co- 
lossians,  199;  on  the  Epis- 
tle to  the  Ephesians,  200 ; 
on  the  Pastoral  Epistles, 


203  ;  on  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  210;  on  the 
Epistles  of  John,  216;  on 
the  Gospel  of  John,  226; 
on  the  book  of  Revela- 
tion, 227. 

Nahum   the  book  of,  156. 
Nicol,    Robertson,    on    the 

Bible,  27. 
Nineveh's  gods,  234. 
Numbers,  the  book  of,  107 ; 

Mosaic     authorship      of, 

no. 

Obadiah.  the  book  of,  156. 
Onesimus  in  the  Epistles  to 

Philemon  and  the  Colos- 

sians,  198. 

Papias  on  the  Logia,  166. 

Pastoral  Epistles,  the,  203. 

Patton  on  Inspiration,  249 
sq. 

Paul's  personal  experience, 
178,  179;  influence  in  the 
early  Church,  177;  con- 
tention with  Peter,  180; 
various  epistles,  190  sq. 

Pentateuch,  the,  theories 
about,  54;  the  author- 
ship of,  54  sq. ;  arguments 
of  the  critics  as  to,  63. 

Persecution  in  the  early 
Church,  209. 

Peter,  the  Epistles  of,  183, 
184. 

Petrie,  Dr.   R,   discoveries 

^^'  75-       ,       ^  .    ^ 

Philemon,  the  Epistle  to, 
197. 

Philippians,  the  Epistle  to 
the,  202. 

Phoenician  writing,  73. 

Physical  science  and  the  Bi- 
ble, 41. 


274 


Index 


Plato  and  Socrates,  163. 

Poetical  books  of  the  Bi- 
ble, 141. 

Polycarp   opinions  of,  219. 

Priests,  theories  about  the, 
126,  135. 

Prophets,  the  Major,  145; 
the  Minor,  156. 

Proverbs,  the  book  of,  143. 

Psalms,  the  book  of,   142. 

Purves,  Geo.  T„  on  the 
Acts,    172;     on   miracles, 

Ramsay,  Prof.,  on  the  his- 
toric value  of  the  Acts, 

173,  175. 

Rawlinson  on  the  Egyptol- 
ogy of  the  Pentateuch, 
'JT\  on  Judges,  103;  on 
the  gods  of  Nineveh,  234. 

Redactors,  the,  60,  (^j. 

Reimarus  on  the  Mosaic 
authorship     of      Genesis, 

54- 

Renan  on  the  Acts,  173 ;  on 
John's  Gospel,  222. 

Revelation,  the  book  of, 
226;  the  process  of  rev- 
elation progressive,  259. 

Roentgen's  discovery  of  the 
X  ray,  22. 

Romans,  the  Epistle  to  the, 
194- 

Sabbatical  year,  the,  103. 

Samuel,  the  books  of,  124. 

Sanday,  Prof.,  on  Tatian's 
Harmony,  219. 

Schmiedel  on  the  Gospels, 
165. 

Science,  the  two-fold  de- 
mands of,  (^. 

Scientific  scholarship,  what 
is?  66  sq. 


Shiloh,  the  place  of  the 
Ark,  and  the  Tabernacle, 
125,  138. 

Siamese  Governor,  story  of 
the  conversion  of,  264. 

Simon,  Richard,  on  Mosaic 
authorship,  54. 

Sinaitic  Peninsula,  98. 

Smith,  George  A.,  address 
of,  at  Edinburgh,  47  sq. 

Smith,  Robertson,  on  the 
fulness  of  revelation,  28; 
on  Christ  as  a  teacher, 
241. 

Song  of  Songs,  the,  which 
is  Solomon's,  143. 

Specialists  disagree,  21. 

Spinoza  on  Mosaic  author- 
ship, 54. 

Staehlin's  critical  imagina- 
tion, 97. 

Staerk,  Addis  on,  23. 

Stanlev  on  the  Tabernacle, 

137- 

Stewart,  Dr.  Alexander,  on 
the  Pentateuch,  118. 

Strauss  on  the  Gospels,  162. 

Study  of  the  Bible  advanc- 
ing, 264. 

Supplement  theory,  58. 

Synoptic  Gospels,  162. 

Tabernacle,  the,  conten- 
tion concerning,  98 ; 
Judges  silent  about,  125; 
theories  about,  135. 

Tatian's  Harmony  of  the 
Gospels,  219. 

Temple,  the,  and  the  Tab- 
ernacle, 135,  137. 

Tertullian  on  the  Hebrews, 
210;  on  John's  banish- 
ment, 229. 

Thackeray,  discussion  re- 
garding, 38, 


Index 


275 


Thessalonians,  First  Epis- 
tle of,  190;  Second  Epis- 
tle of,  191. 

Tubingen  School,  163. 

Tuck  on  the  Pentateuch,  59. 

Ur  of  the  Chaldees  identi- 
fied, 79. 

Van  Dyke  Henry,   on  the 

Bible,  24. 
Vater    on    the    Pentateuch, 

57. 

Victor  Hugo,  on  the  book 
of  Revelation,  230. 

Vitringa  on  Alosaic  author- 
ship, 54. 

Vogel  on  the  "  we "  pas- 
sages in  Acts,  173. 

Ward,  W.  H.,  on  errors  in 
Assyrian  records,  71. 

Watkins  on  value  of  patris- 
tic testimony,  218. 

Wellhausen,  Julius,  on  the 


Pentateuch,  61 ;  on  the 
Tabernacle,   136,  139. 

Westcott,  Canon,  on  rela- 
tion of  the  book  of  Rev- 
elation to  the  Fourth 
Gospel,  227. 

Westminster  Confession  on 
the  need  of  a  revelation, 
88;  on  the  character  of 
different  parts  of  Scrip- 
ture, 251,  253. 

Wilbour's  discovery  at 
Luxor,  78. 

Wisdom     Literature,     the, 

143- 

Wolfian  theory  about  Ho- 
mer, s6. 

Woolsey,  Ex-president,  on 
Inspiration,  247. 

Word  of  God,  the  abiding, 
263. 

Zechariah,    the    book    of, 

156. 
Zephaniah,  the  book  of,  156. 


"~ 

FICTION  BORN  OF  FACT 

THE  INFORMING  SORT 

25th  1,000 

Deborah.     A   Tale  of  the  Times  of  Judas 
Maccabaeus.       By    James    M.    Ludlow. 

Illustrated,  l2mo.      Cloth,  ^1.50. 

*'In  the  prevailing  desert  of  hot-house  sentiment  and  over 
drawn  realism,  a  story  like  Deborah  is  a  veritable  oasis.    It  mus 
certainly  prove   a  work  of  continued   favor  among  those  readers 
who  delight  in  vivid  pictures  of  great  historical  episodes  and  re 
joice  in  a  book  pure  in  tone  and  uplifling.'"— Evening  Star 

By  the  author  o/"7'Ae  Spanish  Brothers''* 

Under  Calvin's  Spell.     A  Historical  Ro- 
mance of  Old  Geneva.     By  D.  Alcock. 

Illustrated.      ^1.50, 

"A  historical  novel  of  the  time  of  Calvin  and  the  Huguenots 
the  scene  centering  in  Geneva  but  shifting  at  times  into  Savoy 
and   France.      The    plot  is    vigorous  with  action,  suspense,  8ur< 
prises  and  critical  situations." 

The  Setting  and  Times  of^^^o  Vadis." 

Onesimus,    Christ's    Freeman.       By 

Charles  E.  Corwin.      Illustrated,  i2mo. 
Cloth,  $1.25. 

*'A  work  of  decided  merit,  not  only  in  the  plot  and  its  work- 
ing  out,  but  also  in  the  skill  with  which  the  author  has  availed 
himself  of  the  meagre  Biblical  material." — The  Outlooi. 
Bishop  Brooks  and  the  Boston  Slums. 

The  Bishop's  Shadow.     By  Mrs.  I.  T. 
Thurston.       With    illustrations   by    M. 
EcKERSoN.      i2mo,  Cloth,  $1.25. 

"A  captivating  story  of  dear    Phillips  Brooks  and   a  little 
street  gamin  af  Boston.     The  book  sets  forth  the  almost  match- 
less character  of  the  Christlike  bishop  in  most  loving  and  lovely 
lines." — The  Interior. 

FLEMING  H.  REVELL   COMPANY 

NEW  YORK           CHICAGO           TORONTO 

■"*■ 

TT    0    H    K    S      BY 
ROBERT  E.  SREER 

MiSSIONAKT  PBINCI- 
PI.BS  AND  PhACTICE. 

A  Discussion  of  Christian 
Missions  and  some   Criti- 
cisms   upon    them.     8vo, 
cloth,  net  ^1.50. 

The  Pbixciples  of 
Jesus. 

As  applied  to  some  Ques- 
tions   of   to-day.       i6mo, 
cloth,  net  80c. 

Chbist  and  Life. 

Papers  on  the  Practice  of 
the  Christian  Life.    i6mo, 
cloth,  net  ^i.cxd. 

Hemembeb 
Jesus  Christ. 

And    other     talks     about 
Christ    and  the    Christian 
Life.     Long  i6mo,   cloth, 
7SC. 

Studies  of  the  Man 
Chbist  Jesus. 

Twelfth  Thousand.  Long 
l6mo,  cloth,  75c. 

Studies  of  the 
Man  Paui-. 

Uniform  with    the     Man 
Christ  Jesui.    Long  i6mo, 
cloth,  75c. 

Missions  and  Politics 
IN  Asia. 

Studies  of  the  Spirit   of  the 
Eastern  peoples,  the  pres- 
ent   makingof  history     in 
Asia,  and  the  part  therein 
of     Christian      Missions. 
Student's  Lectures  on  Mis- 
sions,   Princeton,     izmo, 
cloth,  $1,00. 

A  Memory  AT,  of  a 
True  Life. 

A     Biography     of  Hugh 
McAllister       Bbavbr. 
With    Portrait.         izmo, 
cloth,  $1.00. 

Gambling  and 
Betting. 

A  Frank  Talk  to  Young 
Men  of  To-day,  paper,  net 

IOC. 

The  Situation 
IN  China. 

A    Record    of  Cause   and 
Effect.     i2mo,  paper,  net 
10c. 

Fleming  H.  Revell  Company 

NEW   TORK                        CHICAGO                        TORONTO 

The  Latest  Fiction 
the  inspirinq   sort 


Those  Black  Diamond  Men.     A  Tale 

of  the  Anthrax  Valley.      By    William  F. 
Gibbons.      Illustrated.      $i.5o. 

*'It  is  a  series  of  dramatic  human  scenes,  sometimes  with 
thrilling  incidents,  sometimes  of  tragic  intensity,  sometimes 
touched  with  humor." — Ihe  Outlook, 

By  Order  of  the  Prophet.     A  Tale  ot 

the   Occupation  of  the   Great    Salt    Lake 
Basin.  By  Alfred  H.  Henry.  Illus.  ^1.50. 

True  to  history,  founded  upon  actual  incident,  forceful  in 
the  telling  and  strong  in  the  depiction  of  character,  it  is  a 
worthy  contribution  to  the  literature  of  the  making  of  the  West. 

A  Chinese  Quaker.  An  Unfictitious  Novel. 

By  Nellie  Blessing-Eyster.  Illus.  $1.50. 

The  title  of  this  book  is  the  poet-philanthropist  Whitticr's 
own  phrase  and  itself  forecasts  a  most  romantic  story — a  record 
literally  unique.  Simply  as  a  novel  it  is  entertaining. 

Two  Wilderness  Voyagers     A  True 

Story  of  Indian  Life.    By  Franklin  Welles 
Calkins.      i  zmo,  cloth,  ^1.50. 

"This  romance  of  the  Northwest  graphically  depicts  the 
exciting  adventures  of  escape  and  wandering,  the  drama  of  the 
great  wilderness  with  its  storms  and  floods." 

My  Host  the  Enemy,  and  Other  Tales 
of  the  Northwest.  By  Franklin  Welles 
Calkins.   Illustrated.    I  zmo,  cloth, ^1.50. 

"As  narratives  of  actual  adventure  they  demonstrate  anew 
the  fact  that  truth  is  certainly  stranger  than  fiction," — Tht 
Outloei. 


FLEMING   H.   REVELL    COMPANY 
NEW  YORK  CHICAGO  TORONTO 


Date  Due 

.'r 

.^.^.^^^^^^'''^ 

r 

"jnfiiirmv  Jill  III       lu 

g. 

wmmmmmwisf^ 

h 

_j 

i 

1 

f) 

